Monday, March 19, 2007
A few more notes on deadline-changing
Some more thoughts on efforts to change the filing deadline specifically to accomodate fee referenda.
Recall that last year, ASUC folks squealed like stuck pigs at the thought of changing a date (election date, in this case) because it might affect their precious RSF referendum. Now, however, they want the rules suspended specifically to benefit their referenda. Will they be raising the same "equality!" screams? Probably not.
The Judicial Council ruled that, because the change would harm the proponents of the RSF referenda (by making it pass too late to get approval from the Office of the President, which turned out to be a non-issue), it was invalid. By the same argument, this change would harm the opponents of these three referenda, and should be similarly declared invalid. Not that it will.
Let's take a look at why this change is even being considered. The Senate missed its deadline for passing referenda. Some trivia about the deadline:
1) The deadline is based on the Election dates, which were set by this Senate.
2) The deadline's position relative to the Election dates are set by the By-Laws, which the Senate supposedly carefully reviewed this year.
3) The issues being raised in the two constitutional amendments were weeks (polling locations at dining facilities) or months (money for frats) old by the deadline, and had been raised in Senate meetings more than once.
4) The Senate missed the deadline.
More applause?
. . .
|
. . .
|
