May 17, 2011
Time and time again, we hear the same patronizing justifications from student government leadership.
“We do such important work,” they seem to say. “The average student couldn’t possibly understand.”
From not releasing their budget, to paying more attention to administrators than students, to these new regulations, CCSGA has shown beyond a shadow of a doubt where their loyalties lie. And they’re not with the student body.
In looking at the restrictions The Catalyst reported on last week we’re left with just one simple question.
Should students, and students alone, choose which of their peers should represent their interests?
The bylaws that were passed last week give the Associate Dean of Students veto power over any would-be presidential candidate that hasn’t served in CCSGA for at least a year. Angela Cobian may argue that that isn’t the intention; however, it is indeed the reality.
The one correction The Catalyst does issue is worth mentioning here. For the restrictions to kick in one must serve one year on CCSGA, not two like the article originally reported. In editing the article I asked the reporter to double-check that fact with Sarai Ornelas and she did. There must have been some miscommunication because our reporter did report that in good conscience. I do regret the error but, regardless, it doesn’t change much. The fundamental principle remains the same: anyone outside CCSGA’s sphere of influence must be approved by current members of the organization AND the administration.
By creating these bylaws, the notion that CC students aren’t fit to choose their own leaders becomes institutionalized. Perhaps dressing like an “Aztec goddess” does make it harder to talk about event finance but I just don’t see how that balancing act precludes students from making their own decisions.
Cobian says that administrative approval would, in effect, just mean a candidate isn’t on academic probation and doesn’t have a record of disciplinary issues. Why, then, wouldn’t the bylaws say that instead? Why not at least limit the scope of what an administrator can look at?
Making sure candidates weren’t in any sort of academic or disciplinary trouble would be much easier by clearly stipulating that instead.
Furthermore, I don’t think we should prohibit anybody from running, regardless of his or her disciplinary status. We are adults here and should be given the right to make our own decisions.
Perhaps most importantly, last week’s article presented no conflict of interest or bias. I have no personal interest in the actions of CCSGA outside of my role as Editor of this paper. My only interest is to best serve and inform the CC student body.
I did serve as Ben Quam’s campaign manager and consider both Quam and Regenbogen to be close personal friends. However, they are already elected and both will be graduating next year. These restrictions don’t affect them in the slightest.
The reporter, Ellie Cole, did her own research and did nothing but report the facts. The article was objective and did not editorialize. It went through me, a News Editor and the Chief Copy Editor before going to print.
Contrary to Cobian’s statement, Regenbogen contributed to The Catalyst for the first time last week, offering his reflection on the death of Osama bin Laden. His comments in the election restrictions article were valuable because he is the incoming Executive VP of CCSGA.
Offering his opinion about bin Laden in the same paper that he offers his opinion about the restrictions presents no conflict of interest; it is ludicrous to suggest so. I can’t imagine how that would create a conflict of interest. Professional journalists I rely on for advice agreed. Nowhere in the tombs of journalism law does it say that.
In sum, I stand by our story. I’m proud of the work Cole did last week to report the facts and solicit a diverse range of opinions on the matter, from Cobian’s to Regenbogen’s.
The conflict of interest here has nothing to do with my journalistic integrity. The conflict of interest is inherent in these new restrictions passed by CCSGA. Administrative control does not belong in one of the last bastions where students are granted real decision-making power.
Alex Kronman 