Spring Break
WSG senators cannot be punished for speaking the truth
Stephan Jansen
Issue date: 11/4/09 Section: Opinion
Like my colleagues (past and present), I had previously been reluctant to speak out due to my concerns of personal alienation and political retribution. My concerns are not unwarranted either; I had such an experience during a progressive campaign for student empowerment last semester. Nevertheless, I felt it was my duty to speak for the injustice felt by other WSG veterans in the midst of a controversy that continues to persist.
Some contend that my action of publically criticizing a government official for his reprehensible conduct is out of line. They say that allegations must be deal with in secrecy and behind closed doors. They cite WSG Standing Rule 3.1(A) and state that I can be impeached for "malicious, defamatory, and false statements;" thus, delegitimizing those who "speak badly about WSG."
I disagree. Our government should be transparent and accountable in conduct.
The right for one to express grievances against their government is as fundamental in a democracy as the right to breath. If the truth is defamatory then there is something wrong with government; most importantly, no allegations have been false and the resignation of 17 senators proves this point.
The record is clear, the President has violated the WSG Constitution and Standing Rules on multiple counts and his propriety to the principles of checks and balances has been dismal.
Unanswered questions and concerns still persist to this day. On Oct. 5, 2009, the President informed the senate that $4,000 of Housing Guide Revenue was unaccounted for.
Although the situation was ambiguously explained, many questions remain unanswered. The most concerning among them is why it took five months for the senate to be informed of this problem, and why the President did not adhere to the constitutional guideline of working with the WSG Budget Committee to form the budget. Such representation is appalling before the senate approves over $2 million of organizational funds by the end of the semester.
We must demonstrate the highest standard of accountability and transparency. I look forward to meeting with the President to have these concerns explained and addressed in the near future.
Despite my concerns regarding the President's conduct, I believe the Executive Board, the new senators, and the Vice president have been a pleasure to work with; and have thus far, shown talent and dedication. Perhaps in time, something can be salvaged through this whirlwind of conflict. The wounds of many can be healed through acknowledgement and explanation of wrongs, and a renewed commitment toward cooperation. In the end, we cannot be silent and the truth must be told in full.
Some contend that my action of publically criticizing a government official for his reprehensible conduct is out of line. They say that allegations must be deal with in secrecy and behind closed doors. They cite WSG Standing Rule 3.1(A) and state that I can be impeached for "malicious, defamatory, and false statements;" thus, delegitimizing those who "speak badly about WSG."
I disagree. Our government should be transparent and accountable in conduct.
The right for one to express grievances against their government is as fundamental in a democracy as the right to breath. If the truth is defamatory then there is something wrong with government; most importantly, no allegations have been false and the resignation of 17 senators proves this point.
The record is clear, the President has violated the WSG Constitution and Standing Rules on multiple counts and his propriety to the principles of checks and balances has been dismal.
Unanswered questions and concerns still persist to this day. On Oct. 5, 2009, the President informed the senate that $4,000 of Housing Guide Revenue was unaccounted for.
Although the situation was ambiguously explained, many questions remain unanswered. The most concerning among them is why it took five months for the senate to be informed of this problem, and why the President did not adhere to the constitutional guideline of working with the WSG Budget Committee to form the budget. Such representation is appalling before the senate approves over $2 million of organizational funds by the end of the semester.
We must demonstrate the highest standard of accountability and transparency. I look forward to meeting with the President to have these concerns explained and addressed in the near future.
Despite my concerns regarding the President's conduct, I believe the Executive Board, the new senators, and the Vice president have been a pleasure to work with; and have thus far, shown talent and dedication. Perhaps in time, something can be salvaged through this whirlwind of conflict. The wounds of many can be healed through acknowledgement and explanation of wrongs, and a renewed commitment toward cooperation. In the end, we cannot be silent and the truth must be told in full.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 4
WSG Senator
posted 11/04/09 @ 1:50 AM CST
This article doesn't point out that the entire Senate voted to approve the budget. So the claim that the President didn't comply with the Constitution is false. (Continued…)
Lexington Steele
posted 11/04/09 @ 5:18 PM CST
Oh WSG Senator,
You are just a right-wing elitist pushing your conservative agenda down everyone's throat.
All hail Jansen, Whitewater's hope!
USA! USA! USA!
johnlocke
posted 11/06/09 @ 12:10 AM CST
There has never been a time when the student government has represented the students. If you'd like to look through any of the transcripts of the past 5 years or so, WSG has been little more than a rubber stamp for the University. (Continued…)
John Locke
johnlocke
posted 11/06/09 @ 12:29 AM CST
Well, we have to start with the fact that WSG represents the Deans and not the students. If anyone doubts this, he or she needs only look through the minutes of prior meetings to notice that anytime the University has made a demand, WSG rubberstamps it. (Continued…)
Post a Comment