I read with interest the editorial in today’s (Feb. 7) Daily that accuses the GSB Senate of being too fearful or weak to debate the two resolutions introduced at the Feb. 5 GSB Senate meeting. (I’m used to being characterized as a loudmouth and a blowhard.) It was glaringly apparent that after all these years of sending a reporter to the senate meetings, the editorial board still lacks an understanding of how the GSB senate works.

First, I’d like to point out that all resolutions and bills submitted to the senate are read into the record twice. After the first reading, the author of the bill answers general questions about the bill, but the bill is not debated. At the next meeting, the bill or resolution is read again and then debated. In most instances, a vote follows. (Legislation is occasionally withdrawn before the vote takes place). On a very rare occasion the senate may choose to waive the “two-read” rule and vote on a bill. Unless there is a very compelling reason, a bill must be read twice.

Second, I’d like to remind the editorial board that it is the duty of every senator to represent his or her constituency. These two resolutions are the two most important pieces of legislation the senate has acted on this year. Debate of this bill must be based on intelligent thought, not just passion, and must reflect the wishes of your constituency. Obtaining feedback from those you represent is a sign of responsibility, not a sign of weakness. In addition, debating this bill last Wednesday would have prevented the rights of all members of the student body to speak before the senate.

Finally, I’d like to state publicly that I support both resolutions, and I support all the students who have received such “special” treatment from the OJA: Meron Wondwosen, Theresa Thomas, Taiyon Coleman, Kel Munger, Eric Imerman, A.D. Selha and my colleagues Senators Milton McGriff and Allan Nosworthy. Persecution for exercising their rights to free speech and counsel is inexcusable. Attempting to remove students from leadership positions is reprehensible. Bowing down to the will of the administration, simply because they are the administration shows a lack of character.

Last year I refused to accept the revised election bylaws until the provision that allowed the All-University Election Commission to remove candidates from the ballot was eliminated. I also fought against a proposal that would have allowed a reduction of votes received for election rules infractions. I felt strongly then, and I feel even more strongly now, that the students, AND ONLY THE STUDENTS, should be allowed to choose their representatives. Only students should have the power to remove them.

I’d encourage all members of the student body to attend the next GSB senate meeting. Stand and speak; your voice must be heard. It is your government!

Tricia Sandahl

Graduate Student in Community & Regional Planning and

Public Administration

GSB Senator — Graduate

College