Friday, April 14, 2006
Go go gadget technicality!
Ooooooh! ASUC incompetence strikes again, and this time, it may save us from a fee increase. I rather doubt it, though. I expect the Judicial Council to side with the executive.
Anyway, here are some bothersome points:
The change to by-laws that would allow the entire referendum to be available on the ballot was voted down. WTF? Why? Is having people informed problematic? The entire referendum isn't even available to the general public yet. We've had nothing but Daily Cal articles to guess what's in them. Is the goal of the ASUC to make the language of these referenda as difficult to find as possible? Instead, we'll have the extremely biased and uninformative two-sentence summaries.
Actually, in this case, we'll have a three-sentence summary, because the ASUC senate apparently cannot count to two. That's right. The ASUC was trying to come up with a two-sentence summary, and came up with a three-sentence summary. Good job! (As a hint to the mathematically challenged in our student government, three is larger than two.)
Let's go to the absurd "Well, sure, we didn't follow the laws, but we're the voice of the people, so we shouldn't have to" defense:
However, [ASUC Attorney General Nathan Royer's] decision and authority to remove the referendum from the ballot are being challenged in a Judicial Council suit filed last night by ASUC Academic Affairs Vice President Jason Dixson.
"This language is not biased and the language was passed by the senate and it should go to the vote of the students," said Dixson, one of the authors of the referendum.
Is "not biased" your call to make? If not, shut up. Is "passing by the senate" the requirement? If not, also shut up. The rules are in place for a reason.
The ballot language was not intended to imply that the referendum would go into effect immediately if passed, Dixson said.
Oh, well, hey, if it wasn't intended, it's fine, right? I mean, clearly when folks read the ballot they'll be able to divine the intention of the people who wrote it using that telepathy that the ASUC expects its members to use to follow their government.
"There's a lot of work and negotiation that ASUC officials have done that is potentially being thrown out the window over a small technicality," said ASUC President Manny Buenrostro.
Well, that hurts. 3>2 is a small technicality. Next time, do some of that work and negotiation while paying attention to the rules you approved for yourself, 'kay?
. . .
|
. . .
|
