Letters to the Editor

To Whom It May Concern:

According to Article I, Section I of the Constitution of the Associated Students of Monmouth College (ASMC), it is “established to represent the student body of Monmouth College and to promote its interests, opinions, desires, and attitudes.” Additionally, the Constitution states, “As members of the college community, the students have both the right and duty to participate responsibly in the formation of College Policy.”

To the best of my understanding, this would encourage all students to run for any and all positions available in the Associated Students of Monmouth College (formerly known as Student Senate). However, this same Constitution prohibits students from running if they missed 75 percent of the meetings in either of the previous two semesters before the election.

Consequently, if students study abroad or off campus, they become ineligible to run for an Executive Board position when they return to campus the following semester. Not only does this include studying off campus, but it would also apply to someone who, for whatever reason (such as illness or other personal reasons), had to be away for a prolonged period of time. Further, the rule does not take into consideration that students had previously attended all the Student Senate meetings (the name was not changed to ASMC until this year) for the previous two years.

Typically, students are encouraged to study abroad in their junior year by both the demands of the curriculum and individual departments. There are currently 18 competitive spots available for students to study abroad, per limitations of Monmouth College policy. To hold one of these spots is a privilege, as the competition is tough.

While many students may not be aware of the presence of the ASMC, it is the responsibility of the ASMC to represent the student body as a whole. Thus, the placement of restrictions on those eligible to run prevents the body from being wholly representative of the student body.

This is not to say a person’s attendance should not be discussed at the Presidential Debates in April, but simply that it should not preclude them from running. John Edwards was allowed to run, despite Vice President Richard (Dick) Cheney’s shot at him during the 2004 Vice Presidential debate about his attendance record at Senate meetings.

Hilary Clinton is notorious for being late to meetings and ducking out early, but should that be enough to prevent her from running? Maybe that should be left up to the voters to decide come election time.

Does anyone remember last year’s Student Senate election?

No?

Well, that is likely, because it was not as hotly contested as it was two years ago, or contested at all. President Brandie Miller and Vice President Richard Harrod did not have any opposition. It seems to be shaping up that way again this year, as the only pair that is willing to run against them is being prevented from doing so because one of the students opted to expand her horizons and make the most of the Monmouth College experience.

Subsequently, no one benefits from disqualifying student leaders, except those that are afraid of some healthy competition.

Who suffers?

The student body suffers, as it has to settle for a candidate because of personal bias within the ASMC against the more than qualified pair.

There will be a petition to amend the Constitution to allow all students who for whatever reason were off campus, whether it be studying abroad or personal matters, are able to later run for President of Vice President.

Silvia Fabela ’07