The Cavalier daily :: Wednesday, November 29, 1967 :: University of Virginia Library

Voting to table a plan for
popular election of the Student
Council president, the Council last
night approved two amendments
that would reapportion the Council
and enable amendments to be
passed more easily if ratified by
students in upcoming elections.

In order to be ratified by the
student body and become incorporated
into the Council constitution,
the amendments must be
approved by a majority vote with
60 per cent of the students voting.

New Basis

Acting on a motion by Alan Bigley,
the Council first voted 17-1
to change the Council's basis of
representation to read:

"The number of representatives
from each school shall be determined
as follows:

a) Schools whose enrollment is
between 100 and 350 shall have
one representative;

b) Schools whose enrollment is
greater than 350 shall have one
representative for every 350 students
or fraction of 50 per cent
or more."

Amend More Easily

Frank Homer also introduced an
amendment that would change the
amending process to read "amendments
shall be ratified by two-thirds
of those casting ballots voting
in favor of it." The amendment
passed unanimously.

Mr. Bigley also brought up the
second of the proposed amendments
tabled last week. The proposal,
submitted by Rick Evans,
was that "the President of the
Student Council shall be elected
by popular vote of this entire
student body of the University
from three students nominated by
Council. Nominees shall be
selected from either members of
Council or students whose names
are presented accompanied by a
petition signed by at least 25
students."

Responsible Enough

Jacques Jones opened the discussion
by saying "The Student
Council should not have the power
to control such an election. The
student are sufficiently responsible
to vote on their own."

Parker Brown replied "this is an
excellent compromise, combining
the features of popular election
with the assurance of getting a man
qualified for the job."

Simon Pure

Mr. Homer objected to the plan,
saying "Why compromise at all?
Let's either elect him ourselves
or let the students do it themselves,
not say 'Well, students,
here is your choice. We'll give
you three candidates all selected
as Simon Pure, and they're all
great guys.' "

"We entrust our most sacred
thing, the Honor System, to student
vote." said Bill Moses. "Why
shouldn't we do it with the president
of the student body?"

Ten Candidates?

Richard Jenkins supported this
idea, saying "With an open election,
we might have ten or fifteen
candidates. Such a contest would
preclude any chance of the winner's
having any broad base of
support."

"In a wide open contest," added
Mr. Evans, "The winner might
have much less than 50 per cent
of the votes, since, we have no
truly effective machines for presenting
candidates that are representative
of the whole University."

Mr. Jones countered, however,
that "We could set a minimum
required per cent of votes."

Runoffs Necessary

"That would necessitate runoffs,"
replied Mr. Evans. "To
reiterate, I feel this compromise
allows us to pick competent men
and submit them for student approval.
There is no Xenophobic
thing to keep non-Council members
from running."

Mr. Bigley then moved to amend,
his original motion to read
"Council could nominate between
3 and 5 candidates, with a petition
of 100 names required for
presentation to the Council."
presentation to the Council." He
added that "One does not have
to be a Hallowed Soul to be a
candidate."

Mr. Homer then moved to table
the amendment and original motion,
and his motion passed by a
9-6 vote.