The Cavalier daily :: Friday, October 16, 1970 :: University of Virginia Library

Following last year's running of the
senior class that was marked by slip-shod
management, distrust of the students for
their officers, and allegations of election
scandals, the Student Council has
produced a constitution that in some
areas, can help to achieve order in senior
class government.

Perhaps the single greatest asset in the
proposed constitution is the unity that is
given the class. All the classes of all the
schools are cemented into one senior class for
the whole University. All monies are pooled
into an effective spending reserve. Furthermore,
all schools are represented fairly.

Indeed, there are pressures from some areas
against unity. One faction from one school
wants to secede from the union because it feels
that it is so separated from the University that
it has little in common with the rest of the
graduating class.

There are at least two good reasons not to
separate. The first is money. Each school has a
proportionate share of money collected from
each student's fees. If divided proportionately,
each school would have such a small amount
that few parties or few worthy causes would be
benefited by the funds. Collectively, however,
the money amounts to almost $25,000.

The second reason is more emotional. At
too many universities today, the separation
between various schools is ever widening. A
sense of community and unity is lost. Through
a unified senior class, however, there is at least
a chance for this sense of community and
common goals.

One of the greatest problems in last year's
class was the procedure or lack of procedure in
the running of elections, that helped lead to
allegations of a fixed election and eventually to
the distrust that the students held for their
officers.

Eliminates Scandals

The proposed constitution substantially
helps to eliminate the re-occurrence of such
scandals.

In the election of officers, there were two
choices facing the committee. One was to let
each officer be elected at large. The president
would then have been the candidate receiving
the most votes, the vice-president the second
highest, and so on.

The other choice was to insure each school
of an officer or representative by limiting the
candidates for each officer to certain schools
(except in the presidential race) and allowing
only those degree applicants from that school
to vote in that officer's election.

The committee chose the second course of
action and the reasons are fairly evident. As Mr.
Waitzkin pointed out, the college candidate
would most likely receive the most votes
because the college is the largest school. College
candidates might then have taken more offices
than any other school. The smaller schools may
not have even taken an office and would then
not be represented at all.

Majority Vote

With this restriction in candidacy and voting
goes a necessary clause. A candidate must be
elected by a majority vote. This would avoid
having a candidate win by only a few votes
when a large number of candidates are on the
ballot. In this way, the majority voice is heard.

In addition, this year the Committee on
Political Societies and Elections will run the
election next month. Once the new officers are
elected, the class, according to the constitution,
must then follow the Council's guidelines in
running future elections. If it does not feel it is
possible to hold such elections, the Council will
be called in to help.

Another problem that irritated some
members of last year's class was that no class
meetings had to be held and that no
referendums were ever binding upon the class
officers. Under the new constitution, however,
there must be at least one class meeting per
year.

Division Of Power

Furthermore, any referendum must be held
on the request of 5 per cent of the degree
applicants. If a majority of the voting students
then approve an issue on the referendum, their
decision is binding upon the class officers and
representatives.

Another facet of the constitution that seems
to be mildly reformative is the division of
power between the finance committee and the
executive board.

Last year, too many decisions were made
concerning financial expenditures by the
officers. $3000 for 30 people at two parties did
not seem to be in the best interests of the
majority of the class.

Under the new constitution, there would be
two decision-making bodies and this would help
to alleviate any question of conflict-of-interest
or poor judgment. Furthermore, the class
financial records would be audited by a
commerce student and would be public
knowledge.

Unfortunately, there are certain faults that
one can see in the proposed constitution.

One glaring mistake seems to be in the
appointment of graduate class representatives
by the president of each school rather than the
election of representatives. Since the presidents
of the schools are also members of the honor
committee, this added responsibility throws
them into the political arena of class
government.

Gross Errors

Second, some of the functions of the
committee may, in the future, lead to gross
errors in judgment. One instance of this is in
the class gift committee. This committee is
supposed to solicit suggestions for the class gift
and to decide upon a gift through a method
deemed appropriate by the committee. While
this procedure would eliminate an arbitrary
decision by a few class officers, if no
referendum were to be held, a decision might
be just as arbitrary and different from the
majority's wishes as a decision to be made by a
few officers.

The faults with the proposed constitution,
however, are far outweighed by its advantages.
The constitution helps to guarantee a somewhat
unified class, fair elections, and division of
powers. The mistakes or errors that come to
light with time can be rectified by the orderly
process of government insured by the proposed
charter.