Next week!

A Bill in Support of Fiscal Accountability in the ASUC: This bill establishes limits on stipends for student group leaders. It also requires them to be approved by the Senate. But check this out:

THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, the previous amendment take effect immediately, and any such groups that have already exceeded these limitations stop receiving stipend/s payments upon the passage of this bill for the 2006-07 year.

That may be pushing the ex-post facto limitations of the Constitution. It seems like it effectively modifies the budget that was already approved by the Senate. I guess it comes down to just how much control the Senate has over student group funding decisions.

A Bill in Support of Equal Protection for All Candidates in the ASUC Elections: This seeks to have better communications with candidates. As a broad goal, it's interesting, but it's a Vishal bill, so we can see the tricks:

A lawful order from the ASUC Judicial Council or Elections Council must be submitted electronically to all candidates, current ASUC elected officials, the ASUC Attorney General and Solicitor General, and the ASUC Secretariat at least twenty-four (24) hours before such an order takes effect. The Chair of each respective council will be responsible for the distribution of any lawful orders issued by his/her council.

This makes it impossible for either the Elections Council or the Judicial Council to react quickly to issues which do not have 24 hours to be corrected. A more sensible amendment would be to require that notification be provided 24 hours before candidates can be held responsible for violating those orders. But that, of course, assumes the goal is to actually protect candidates, rather than strip power from the Councils.

All temporary rules must also be submitted electronically to all candidates, current ASUC elected officials, the ASUC Attorney General and Solicitor General, and the ASUC Secretariat within twenty-four (24) hours of official approval by the ASUC Judicial Council. The Chair of the Judicial Council shall be responsible for the distribution of all approved temporary rules.

This misses it completely. The temporary rules should be submitted electronically to those parties at the same time they are submitted to the Judicial Council for approval. This allows those parties to file briefs and try to protect their rights in the Judicial Council. Again, though, this assumes the issue is candidate rights, rather than limiting the power of folks to defend their rights.

A Bill in Support of Timely Implementation of Approved Propositions: This bill seperates certification of election results for elected officials and propositions, so that if one set gets tied up because of Judicial Council cases and such, the other can take effect. The Judicial Council already claims this authority, and did it last year (in fact, they certified individual offices), but I guess this clarifies things.

A Bill for the ASUC to endorse the "PHILADELPHIA CONSENSUS STATEMENT On University Policies for Health-Related Innovations": Stuff. Something about licensing and such to make sure that no health-related innovations are ever profitable, I think.

A Resolution in Support of SB 832: It... uh... supports SB 832. Something about textbooks and disclosure of their plans for them to professors.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 4/03/2007 02:10:00 PM #
Comments (4)

. . .

Comments:

the 24 hour restriction on the judicial council is definitely unconstitutional. and "equal protection" wtf does that have to do with this -- do these people even know what that means??

# posted by  Anonymous : 12:54 PM, April 04, 2007

 

The equal protection argument is that everyone needs to be informed of such orders and rules. I don't think that's fundamentally incorrect, but they went about it in a manner which allowed them to achieve their other goals, as well. I've provided an alternative, though that assumes good faith on the part of Vishal.

# posted by  Beetle Aurora Drake : 2:21 PM, April 04, 2007

 

equal protection in that sense is already guaranteed, since all J-Council actions have to be publicly posted and sent to a list of recipients (probably inlcuding all those people mentioned in this bill). as for sending it directly to all the candidates, that might be a little difficult, but the Elections Council has always forwarded important notifications to the candidates.

# posted by  Anonymous : 1:50 PM, April 05, 2007

 

That is not true. The approval of Temporary Rule 1, as well as the rulings on some advisory opinions Jessica requested concerning elections were not sent to me (for example), nor are they available anywhere that I know of.

# posted by  Beetle Aurora Drake : 2:15 PM, April 05, 2007

 

Post a Comment