University of Virginia Library

Referendum: Some Notes

Voters today and tomorrow will discover,
in addition to ballots for Student Council and
Judiciary Committee posts, a discouragingly
long list of items proposed as referenda. While
the natural response may be to disregard the
bulky second ballot, those who take time to
consider the points will find issues raised
which deserve careful attention.

I.

Last on the ballot, but among the most
important matters at hand is that section of
Student Council's opinion survey which asks:
Do you favor the proposed high-rise apartment
buildings on Lambeth Field? The wording is
poor because it gives the false impression that
this is an all-or-nothing affair. In fact, the
object is to gain a reading of student
sentiment regarding whether or not the
proposed plan should be studied further. In
view of widespread doubts concerning the
efficacy of high-rise dormitories, a NO vote
will help insure against premature action
which might be regretted later.

II.

Despite the fact that Council last week
decided to water down what would have been
a binding referendum on he issue of a strike
proposed for May 3, 4, and 5 - inserting
instead an "opinion" item on a "non-violent,
non-coercive moratorium in protest against
the Indochina War and in memory of Kent
State and Jackson State" - the basic issue
remains unchanged. The phrasing is insipid
because a majority of the Council
representatives panicked at the last minute
when confronted with the possibility that the
student body might instruct them to provide
leadership for a May strike.

In so doing Council acted in bad faith. No
doubt, had there been time, petitions could
have been circulated which would have
guaranteed the strike issue a place among the
actual referenda, and not simply a spot on the
opinion survey. Nevertheless, the first days of
May will see a variety in issues raised which
demand that we pause in our daily routines.
Vote YES for the moratorium.

III.

Also on the opinion survey is the question:
Do you favor withdrawal of all U.S. forces
from Vietnam, Laos and Cambodia by
December 31, 1971? YES.

IV.

A topic which had held interest for many
is the proposal of a "New Constitution,"
which would abolish the present Student
Council and substitute a bicameral legislative
body of 300 elected representatives, including
an executive senate of ten members.
Anarchists with a taste for constitutional
mayhem will find the proposed document
most intriguing. Others will join us in voting
NO.

V.

Second among the referendum items is
Student Council's proposal to amend its
present constitution as follows: "The results
of a referendum shall be binding upon
Council only if at least forty percent (40%) of
the electorate has voted in said election."
Currently, a referendum becomes binding on
Council on simple majority approval by those
who vote. In the past voter turnouts have
often fallen below the 40 percent level.

While this is a poor commentary on the
state of civic activism on the Grounds, we see
no reason why an apathetic, non-voting
majority should stand between an active
minority of voters and the issues they may
select for Council's attention. Clearly, the
proposed amendment, which requires a
two-thirds vote for passage, is designed to
curtail the right of students to instruct their
elected representatives in referenda.

Given the realities of a semi-active
electorate, a NO vote will best serve the
interests of those who care enough to
organize and make their feelings known.

VI.

The issue of a $750 salary for the Student
Council President, which has been approved
for the first time by Council, promises to
draw controversy. Many will argue that the
figure is too large, or that remuneration
should be distributed hourly or weekly, rather
than in a lump sum. However, if the next
president does his job and spends the long
hours necessitated by the role, he will have
earned his pay. The money would be taken
from students and is not out of line with the
salaries paid to student leaders in comparable
positions.

In all fairness, one must acknowledge the
incentive factor involved: a YES vote on the
salary will improve the state of the office of
president, and it should serve to underscore
his important position as a true servant of the
people.

VII.

Finally, there is the Judiciary Committee's
proposal to amend the constitution such that
undergraduate candidates need only two
semesters in retrospect, instead of the
traditional three. Graduate candidates for the
Judiciary Committee would be relieved of all
semester requirements, whereas before they
had to have been here at least one term. If
adopted the amendment would open the field
to more people, and a YES vote therefore
seems a sound choice.