Tonight, the Associated Students of Madison will raise their hands for or against a special election centered on the approval of a new ASM constitution—a document designed to restructure the function and make-up of UW-Madison’s student government. But before this Board jumps into the nitty gritty, let us just say, while it is highly unlikely, we are crossing our fingers that student council approves.
Over the course of the year, this Board has watched in dumbfounded awe, and written in genuine concern, about the drastic transformation of ASM distorting the purpose and function of our student government. With futile internal struggles plaguing the majority of their agenda, ASM’s status as a self-governing body has increasingly become overwhelmingly vain and ineffective to the general student body.
Spending a large portion of the fall semester bickering about who was and who was not eligible to serve as vice-chair, while repeatedly defending funding cuts to one of the 750 student organizations on campus as well as council itself, ASM’s new grassroots mantra has failed to provide the concrete and unified governmental structure needed to represent the general student interest.
Why might that be? Because they have been too busy protecting their own.
From editorial to editorial, this Board has consistently analyzed and scrutinized ASM’s shortcomings. From the start of the year, we brought attention to salient student issues we believed council had a responsibility to address. We handed out a wide range of suggestions and critiques to ASM’s agenda. We even caved in and gave our two cents on the wasteful disputes engulfing a disproportionately large amount of ASM time. And while our articles may have sparked dissent rather than discussion from many student council representatives, we realized our opinion didn’t stand-alone.
A number of student leaders, college governments and student organization heads expressed the same sentiment: This year’s ASM has failed as an institution. We need a better-organized governmental structure so we can increase ASM’s efficiency and include a larger student voice.
Thus, the ASM Constitution Committee was born. As simple as that.
Comprised of The Badger Herald and The Daily Cardinal Editorial Boards, a few current ASM members, student organization heads and members from outside student governments, the ACC’s make-up embodied a colorful selection of student leaders across campus—leaders who agreed on one thing.
Let us be clear. By no means were any under the table tactics implemented in this group’s formation. No mission to unfairly rewrite powers or give individual favors underlined the group’s intent. The ACC was founded on the notion that every member in it shares a common interest to create a better ASM. And to do this, we made it abundantly clear that the student body was to be involved in the drafting process. In fact, one stipulation our Editorial Board had upon joining the committee was that it would be an open process. And it was.
Last semester the group met to create, formulate and better articulate an idea. We created a version of the constitution that best represented our mission and immediately presented it to the campus as a whole. From there, we expected input from all facets of the university. As the document rested on a malleable precedent, it was our goal to change and rewrite the constitution based on the suggestions we received. Many times throughout the drafting process we made notes—particularly when it came to the new Senate—and wait to hear what feedback we would get from students. The handful of the suggestions we received were contemplated, discussed and many were eventually included in the document.
With that, while we understand representatives’ concerns surrounding the drafting process, this Editorial Board can’t stress enough the importance each individual member placed on listening and weighing student input as much as possible. Our Board has been incredibly conscious of being clean and transparent throughout the entire initiative because we wholeheartedly believe in the ACC’s mission to better our student government.
No corruption, no power-hungry intentions and no funny business outlined the ACC’s purpose. Student interests were always at the forefront of the conversation. That said, we urge students and council to stop focusing on a problem that does not exist and start contributing to the conversation. No one on ASM can say that its current governmental model is working seamlessly for the student body. And while we do not expect the new constitution to fix every problem, it is an effort to start.
So when council debates the ACC’s proposed constitution tonight, we strongly encourage representatives to look through the guts of the document, recognize the ACC’s genuine intentions and ask clarifying questions before angrily writing it off.
If ASM members need some starting points, we are more than willing to help. Representatives should debate how the proposed constitution will involve other UW-Madison college governments. They should debate the new funding streams that will make it easier for groups to acquire funds to help the campus. They should also ask how the executive would work.
ASM members have asked their share of questions about the process of drafting the proposed constitution, and they have been answered over and over again. ACC members are ready to answer questions about the constitution itself.
Each member on the ACC joined the committee because they care greatly about ASM and its functionality. The quality of our student government has the power to impact campus on an incredibly broad scale. The new constitution and those who helped draft it believe and recognize this power. If you do too, raise your hand.
