Before I get down to business, I think I need to address an accusation leveled against me by the Government of the Student Body president.

In a letter to the editor appearing in Monday’s Daily, Adam Gold stated the information I presented concerning Memorial Union Managing Director Mary Jo Mertens’ handling of the McDonald’s issue and the like was “plainly incorrect.”

I would remind Gold that I served on the Memorial Union Board of Directors for a year and a half. I would remind Gold that I have kept all of the minutes from the board meetings and that everything I have written concerning Mertens is substantiated by the minutes.

If Gold would like to know more about how the Union is really run, I would be more than happy to provide him with the facts, which, at this point, it seems he is lacking.

Anymore, though, I wonder how much the GSB really represents student interests.

I’ve been on this campus for five years. During those five years, my attitude toward the student leadership on this campus has turned from moderate optimism to absolute disdain.

When I first came to ISU, I placed importance on student involvement on campus, especially in the political arena. I honestly believed that if enough students became involved and set substantial goals, they could accomplish those goals.

Part of this optimism originated from my own desire to enter politics after college — perhaps not as a candidate, but at least as a member of the executive branch or as a political adviser.

I thought that the electorate is generally educated enough to tell the difference between someone who actually wants to work in the best interests of the populace and someone who simply wants to build his or her reputation and power base.

Then I sat through a few GSB elections and the resultant administrations. It was then that I realized that politics at the local level, and not just politics at the national level, is nothing but a game used by selfish and ignorant people to pursue their own agendas.

Let’s just take a look at some of the brilliant revelations concerning the McHub made by some of our respected GSB members during the past few months.

This is just a sampling. It in no way represents the views of the entire GSB, nor does it represent the degree of commitment and dedication by each individual senator. It simply makes you go “Hmmm…”

July 17, 1996: In almost the least thought-out statement ever made by an elected official, GSB President Adam Gold raised hopes for an impeachment proceeding when he responded to the anti-McHub contingent at an open forum by stating, “You weren’t consulted. I was. The majority of students on this campus want this McDonald’s. You are a very vocal minority. What’s going on is you’re upset. That’s fine. Realize you are a minority.”

You minorities just stay where you are and keep quiet, damn you. Your job is to just lie there and let the majority do whatever the hell it wants. Gold was elected by the majority. He has a mandate. If you can’t respect the man, at least respect the mandate.

Resistance is futile. You will be assimilated.

Sept. 10, 1996: In the most least-thought-out statement ever made by an elected official, OCC Sen. Mark Nimmer said about the McHub, “I’m very much in favor of capitalist expansion. I think we are all headed there anyway, so why not now?”

I have to disagree. I think the ISUCard is the most obvious example of communism yet to be found on the ISU campus.

However, because the decision for the McHub was made by business elites without much desire to involve the common student, I’ll give the man the benefit of the doubt.

Okay, so the guys had bad days. It doesn’t mean either they or the GSB are inherently evil. But some things definitely need to change.

I remember going to the GSB meetings last year on a regular basis. In all honesty, I doubt whether half of the senators gave a damn about what the students were saying during those meetings.

Most of the senators were talking to each other or walking out of the room whenever it came time to listen to the students.

The Browsing Library/Chapel discussion is a great example of apparent apathy on the part of specific GSB representatives.

For those of you who are new to this issue, the Memorial Union Board of Directors had thought about removing the Browsing Library and Chapel from the ground floor of the Union in order to accommodate student office space.

The GSB held lengthy debates on the issue. Students filled the GSB meetings, and the vast majority of those students were opposed to removal. The GSB vote was close, but the senators voted for removal. A week later, the resolution was withdrawn.

When asked by the Board of Directors why the GSB withdrew its resolution, then GSB President Dan Mangan said the issue was tying up the student government and the senators just couldn’t get anything done.

In other words, the students who were opposed to the removal and who voiced their opposition at the meetings were not making it easy for the senators to fulfill their personal agendas.

Damn students. Who gave them the right to get politically active?

Obviously, senators and executives are going to have their own opinions on important issues. If they didn’t, they wouldn’t be leaders.

The GSB senators, however, are not just leaders. They are representatives. They need to learn how to show proper respect to those they are supposed to be representing, even when they may disagree. This does not include using the term “liberal freaks.” The freaks may take offense.

This is a new senate. It would be folly to assume the senators will behave exactly as did the senators from last year, but let the challenge be issued.

If the GSB cannot show proper respect for the ideas of its constituents, even those who may disagree with the senators, then the GSB shall become the most disrespected student organization on this campus, regardless of the size of its wallet.

---

Theresa WIlson is a graduate student in political science at ISU and a law student at Drake University.