SGA: Should we keep it?

I welcome our new robot overlords

Karl Sarvestani

Elections again approach, and the air is thick with apathy. I'm not talking about the presidential election but the Capstone's SGA. This august body is much like the United Nations in that while it is much-maligned for its supposed inefficacy, its existence is simply better for everyone than the alternative.

It is in this environment that the SGA has continued to bring its constituency such services as funding for student activities and programs, interest-free short term loans and academic support services such as free rental of graphing calculators and a test bank. Perhaps an individual student will never avail himself of any of these services, but their existence is of obvious utility, and such fringe benefits are hardly the true purpose of the SGA.

The primary utility of the SGA lies in its capacity as a government, specifically, a democracy. While the SGA may lack the ability to back its swaggering pronouncements on terrorism and hurricanes, it wields a considerable amount of clout on this campus, allowing student voices to be heard in the usually obscure bureaucratic machinations through which this University is administered. The Judicial Board allows students a venue of appeal for parking violations and for cases arising from both academic and nonacademic misconduct.

A University education is about more than simply a curriculum - it is a dynamic process that serves to prepare students for the future. While certainly not its sole function, an important purpose of the University is to prepare students for their chosen careers. An oft-neglected strength of the SGA is the singularly unique ability to allow students "to train ourselves in democratic government." Look no further than Montgomery to see how influential SGA alumni are. The SGA is indeed "a powerful learning tool that serves as a real-world simulation of politics," as my learned colleague points out.

Then there is the issue of a certain select coalition of traditionally white fraternities and sororities designed to influence campus politics. "Don't you know what these 'people' do?" bitter independents rush to ask. "We can't let them continue their reign of tyranny over this campus!"

They then raise the case of Emily Aviki, a former member of Chi Omega sorority (which is totally a member of said select coalition; yes, I'm talking to you, "ladies") whom this paper referred to as "an Iranian-American student" a few more times than was really appropriate. When Aviki decided to run a Senate campaign in 2003 without the blessing of the aforementioned select coalition, she became a target of their intimidation. Then, the unthinkable happened - she won. Even with the open animus of an entire coalition (and a select one, at that) of traditionally white fraternities and sororities brought to bear upon her, Aviki won her Senate seat. These schmucks are a non-threat.

Governments are instituted among students, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed. Whenever any form of government becomes destructive of its students' needs, it is the right of the students to alter it and to institute new government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form most likely to effect their safety and happiness. If you don't like what the SGA is doing for you, then become involved in it and make it work better for all of us.

Karl Sarvestani is a senior in New College. Moral Kombat runs biweekly on Thursdays.

Man versus Machine

Chase Espy

With elections quickly approaching, the time has come to consider whether our hallowed SGA is worth caring about enough to engage in the democratic process. Next week, the cadre of devoted independents will renew their annual plea for people to vote, while most consider the point moot because the Machine has already etched the results in stone. But should you even care?

Over the years, I have discovered the root of the SGA's ineffectuality - the vicious circle of apathy. Every year, the SGA fails to demonstrate its relevance to the student body, and every year the student body responds apathetically by not voting or not participating. Apathy among voters leads to ineffective office-holders on both the independent and Machine sides of the aisle. These officers then fail to fulfill the expectations of the people whom they are purportedly representing, which fosters even more apathy among the voters. Rinse and repeat.

And who can really blame them for being apathetic when the Machine installs presidents who accidentally admit to the existence of their secret organization or get arrested in Birmingham? To be fair, the SGA as an organization should be judged on its own merits, not the demerits of its figureheads or other "elected" officials. Looking back on my college career, I can recall some iconic moments in SGA history: the denouncing of terrorism, admonition of Katrina and condolences to her victims and the acquisition of useless PDAs using student funds to conduct "un-scientific" research on student opinions.

The SGA does serve one purpose on our campus, however. It is a powerful learning tool that serves as a real-world simulation of politics. Like our national government, the SGA has an executive chosen undemocratically by political machinations and an inept legislative branch that spends more time patting themselves on the back for wasting the people's money than it does producing results. For proof, one need only look to current and former government office-holders - veteran state senator Roger Bedford, former governor Don Siegelman, former chairman of the state Democratic Party Bill Blount and more, who were all former Machine members, active in the SGA.

But we should ask ourselves whether we really want our future leaders actively taking part in an organization that is guided by the invisible hands of the Machine, which threatens those who dare oppose it with physical violence. It would be one thing if the SGA were merely a neutral, ineffectual organization that could be ignored. However, the SGA is a powerful force on campus, wielding a budget culled from student activity fees that it distributes at its own discretion.

I sympathize with my classmates who face a tough decision during this election. The "Hobbesian choice" between the handpicked leader of a Greek cabal designed to perpetuate the good ol' boy system and the president of the table tennis club is a regrettable one. In reality, though, the solution is not to fix the broken system. The solution is to scrap the system altogether. I encourage you, instead of voting, to lobby the administration to disband the SGA once again. Once again, you ask? There is precedent for such a move. It happened in 1993, when one of the candidates for SGA president was assaulted in her own home by Machine members.

I suggest that we not wait so long this time before rejecting the SGA in favor of a group of student leaders who will advance the interests of their constituency in lieu of their own. Otherwise, when (or if) you vote, remember what you're voting for.

Chase Espy is a first-year law student. Moral Kombat runs biweekly on Thursdays.