2008 Woodie Awards
Misguided guidance
Issue date: 4/16/03 Section: Editorials
- Page 1 of 1
Rental cars. Housing. African-American Studies Program. Basketball. AFIRMS. Lockdown. Club Union. Fair Trade Coffee. PATRIOT Act. These are the topics of just a few of the resolutions brought to the floor in GUSA Assembly meetings over the course of the past year. Those that pass are submitted to the GUSA president for approval. Once executive approval is obtained … then what?
While some of these causes may be worth supporting or in desperate need of attention, it is a waste of the Assembly’s time to “resolve” issues that they will never solve. Two main problems exist with the performance of the Assembly over the past year: either the resolutions they debate and pass are not their own work, or the goal of the resolution far outstrips the actual power GUSA has to implement its own ideas.
For example, in January a resolution proposed by sophomore representative Mike Lanzara asked that some men’s basketball games be played in the McDonough Arena. Would it be great to have basketball games on campus? Unquestionably. Unfortunately, this proposal makes an unoriginal, already-decided point. Although a popular plan, deciding where basketball games are played is a choice made by several organizations, both within and outside of the University. Practical factors beyond spectator convenience must be considered as well. In short, by passing this resolution GUSA has not advanced student interests or created even the beginnings of a solution to the problem it attempts to address.
Then there are resolutions in support of student-activist groups such as AFIRMS, Eco-Action or Fair Trade Coffee. While GUSA can and should serve as the voice of student opinion to the administration, these resolutions are largely the result of the work of small, specific clubs. Very rarely is there evidence of wide-spread student support for these issues, a distinction GUSA must be careful to make both to itself and the administration. Also, simply passing a resolution is a very minor part of the advocacy work these issues require, and GUSA as an organization, as well as individual assembly members, should not claim more credit than they deserve when these measures fail or succeed in the community at large.
In its constitution, GUSA lists the purposes and aims of the Assembly. Noticeably absent from these purposes and goals is to become a platform for student activists. The closest the Constitution comes is to this claim is “to investigate and act in any matter which affects and promotes the general welfare of the student body of Georgetown University or elements thereof.” GUSA, and the student body, would be better served by an Assembly that stuck to the task at hand.
While some of these causes may be worth supporting or in desperate need of attention, it is a waste of the Assembly’s time to “resolve” issues that they will never solve. Two main problems exist with the performance of the Assembly over the past year: either the resolutions they debate and pass are not their own work, or the goal of the resolution far outstrips the actual power GUSA has to implement its own ideas.
For example, in January a resolution proposed by sophomore representative Mike Lanzara asked that some men’s basketball games be played in the McDonough Arena. Would it be great to have basketball games on campus? Unquestionably. Unfortunately, this proposal makes an unoriginal, already-decided point. Although a popular plan, deciding where basketball games are played is a choice made by several organizations, both within and outside of the University. Practical factors beyond spectator convenience must be considered as well. In short, by passing this resolution GUSA has not advanced student interests or created even the beginnings of a solution to the problem it attempts to address.
Then there are resolutions in support of student-activist groups such as AFIRMS, Eco-Action or Fair Trade Coffee. While GUSA can and should serve as the voice of student opinion to the administration, these resolutions are largely the result of the work of small, specific clubs. Very rarely is there evidence of wide-spread student support for these issues, a distinction GUSA must be careful to make both to itself and the administration. Also, simply passing a resolution is a very minor part of the advocacy work these issues require, and GUSA as an organization, as well as individual assembly members, should not claim more credit than they deserve when these measures fail or succeed in the community at large.
In its constitution, GUSA lists the purposes and aims of the Assembly. Noticeably absent from these purposes and goals is to become a platform for student activists. The closest the Constitution comes is to this claim is “to investigate and act in any matter which affects and promotes the general welfare of the student body of Georgetown University or elements thereof.” GUSA, and the student body, would be better served by an Assembly that stuck to the task at hand.