A couple of years ago, when I was a member of the Daily’s Editorial Board, the Government of the Student Body Senate at the time didn’t like it when the paper published editorials that were critical of the Senate’s legislation or conduct.

Some of the senators liked to make us aware of that fact by threatening to cut our funding for the next year. I remember specifically coming into the office one day and finding a telephone message from one of the more influential senators left for the Editorial Board that said he really hoped that day’s editorial didn’t affect our allocation of GSB funds that year. A thinly veiled threat.

I picked up the Daily on Monday and discovered that although the bully tactics have changed, the spirit behind them has not.

On Monday it was revealed that GSB President Adam Gold has asked GSB Adviser Terri Houston to resign, in part because of her criticism of the senators following a heated GSB senate meeting last Wednesday. Houston criticized the senators for not showing respect to each other and students in the audience during the meeting.

It seems that the role of an adviser should be to tell those in her charge when they are doing something wrong. In other words, Houston was doing her job.

Gold’s request for Houston’s resignation was a disgrace. The senate can vote to get rid of Houston, but even considering such action would only add to the shame everyone associated with the GSB should be feeling for Gold’s actions.

If Gold or any of the senators are too sensitive to take the constructive criticism of someone whose job is to advise them, they should quit now, because the conflict in the senate has only just begun.

All of this began with the introduction of two bills to reconsider funding that was already approved for the Big Eight Conference on Black Student Government, which spurred a heated debate at last week’s GSB meeting.

One bill, sponsored by Sen. Mark Nimmer, calls for the elimination of the travel expenses which would cut the allocation in half. The other bill, which Sen. John Hamilton has now withdrawn, would have required that any profits made from the conference be returned to the GSB discretionary fund.

At the time his bill was introduced, Hamilton said he wanted to set a precedent that would require profits made from events funded from the discretionary fund be returned to that fund. He has withdrawn the bill because he was advised that parliamentary procedure does not allow a bill that has been passed and signed to be reconsidered or amended.

Hamilton’s idea was not without merit, and he should continue to pursue it. However, he and the other senators should take this whole incident as a lesson in tact and timing. Trying to set a precedent is one thing, but choosing such a potentially touchy subject as the base for your precedent was a bad idea.

Giving the impression that the GSB senate wanted to treat a group of black students differently than it treats other groups led to charges of racism.

Sen. Nimmer’s proposal to cut the transportation funding from the allocation is also not without merit, but he should have thought of it earlier. It takes two weeks for a bill to pass the senate through normal procedure. The purpose of that two week period is to give the senators time to think about the bills. Once again, the senate gave the impression being combative with a group of black students, and charges of racism were the result.

I don’t believe these senators are racist, but they failed to recognize the possible consequences of their actions, and a lot of hurt feelings and hostility are the result.

While I’ve got my bashing stick out, I’d like to mention another disturbing trend in the GSB senate proceedings. Because my part-time job (brain surgeon) keeps me busy on Wednesday nights, I have only attended one GSB meeting this year, but I have been to the GSB office to read the minutes. The senators seem to have fallen into the habit of voting to consider all new bills as being read without actually reading them.

The first reading of a bill is intended to let the senators ask questions about the intent of the bill, and to get them thinking about it. In the interests of ending the meeting as soon as possible, the senators have been skipping this part.

The lone voice of opposition to this laziness has been Sen. Jamey Hansen, who represents the College of Education and also happens to be the former Managing Editor of the Daily, which means he had a say in making sure I get paid. You did one hell of a job, Jamey!

Seriously, this is a problem. The senators need to suck it up and follow procedure properly. You wanted to be a GSB senator because it looks good on your resume, but I’m afraid you actually have to do the job, too. That takes time.

The GSB senate is capable of doing a better job than it has been doing. Some of this criticism may seem a little harsh, but Adam Gold didn’t appoint me, so I don’t have to worry about losing my job.

---

Steven Martens is a senior in journalism mass communication from Cedar Rapids.