Its silly. Do not worry about the WHO. Worry about the WHAT! I'm speaking serious stuff. Does it really matter who is saying it?
Tuesday, December 30, 2008
Sunday, December 28, 2008
IC SGA Vol. 3 (E-Board part I)
Welcome back (Kotter)! Some positive response to the blog so far. Its weird because I feel as if I am just tal
king common sense, but sometimes that's too much for people, and they decide either they can't take it, or discredit it because its too real for them. I would dare anyone to challenge me that SGA has been doing an excellent job this year, or that the Ithacan has been doing an excellent job covering student government actions. SGA may not be the U.S. Congress, but it is supposed to be the representative body for Ithaca College Students. If they fail to listen to the voice of the students, or are completely dysfunctional where they lose the respect of the people then they run the risk of not being recognized as the TRUE voice of the students. Where does it say that another group of people could organize and challenge the SGA's supremacy for student representation.? I know that the SGA is the current end all be all is the eyes of the students and the administration. The SGA is said to be the only recognized voice to the administration. But whose to say if that would be forever?
The only way the claim above would prove true is if the Student Government fulfills its commitment to operate as a productive organization. If they fail to live up to that, then anything is up for grabs, including complete dissolution, and starting from scratch. The reason any of this is even being discussed, even though some choice to ignore that there is any problems whatsoever, is the continued troubles of this years SGA. As much as it pains me to admit, the root of the problems must be laid at the feet of the Executive Board.
The current E-Board was elected with such promise, and had such designs of grandeur. The Reconstruction Team vowed to revamp the entire SGA and make improvements on the past few years. The plans were pretty generalized, but there was room and time to fill in the gaps. The problem was that the semester began, the SGA got going, and the plan never took shape. There has been no revamping, there has been virtually nothing going on this semester. Why has the SGA failed to live up the promises they made in April? Maybe the more importan
t question is, why hasn't anyway (besides me) called them out before on their lack of action. I am trying hard to pointing out individual people, so please bear with me. It is not as if I have a personal grudge against them as a group, but rather personally worried about the state of the SGA in their hands.
Lets try to run down the list of problems related directly to the Executive Board this year. Maybe the first problem has to do with the actual size of the SGA. In the past year the E-board has increased in size, adding the alumni relations position, and the increased responsibility to the note secretary and the chairperson. No knock on them, but non of these positions are voted in by the students. And I'm sure they have good intentions, but in all honesty they should not wield as much power as they do during this session of the SGA. Its my opinion that an executive board with so much responsibility will function better with a small group of people working in better unison and cohesion, than a large group that has trouble communicating. I am all for diversity in a group and having voices from different perspectives, but when it comes to the E-board, they must be able to function, make decision, provide strong initiative and oversight. The senate is more for the diversity and providing the voice of the people. The executive board should be bringing the issues to the table, and starting the debate. This years e-board is exclusively reactionary, and has not shown the initiative for real CHANGE this year.
One of the other major problems has been the fact that two elected E-Board members served only half of the year. I cannot stress this enough; this is a HUGE PROBLEM. From day one the clock was ticking on these two members, and they were basically lame ducks before October break. It is truly unfair to the student body to try to get yourself elected when you know before hand that you can only serve half a semester. SELFISH is the only way to describe this action. And it doesn't matter how much good work they were able to do before the end of fall semester, because in January they will not be there. New elections were needed in December and now we have two new VP's coming in and having to learn on the job, and mesh with an E-board and senate who has been together since September. There needs to be strict term restrictions for VP's to prevent students who plan to leave mid-semester from being elected. We do the same for students who study abroad in the fall and return for the spring. It is discriminatory to continue that current practice. We shouldn't hate on those wanting to study abroad, but it is only fair to the student population for SGA members to serve a full term (student trustees are chosen knowing they can not go away for two years and must serve their position).
Writing this blog I realize that it is hard to fit everyth
ing in an entry without sounding like a pompous ass or going too long, and losing the audience. I just want to bring to light some serious issues, and I understand it is going to take some serious time and commitment before this comes to be. But for now, I am out. Be safe and be well. 1
king common sense, but sometimes that's too much for people, and they decide either they can't take it, or discredit it because its too real for them. I would dare anyone to challenge me that SGA has been doing an excellent job this year, or that the Ithacan has been doing an excellent job covering student government actions. SGA may not be the U.S. Congress, but it is supposed to be the representative body for Ithaca College Students. If they fail to listen to the voice of the students, or are completely dysfunctional where they lose the respect of the people then they run the risk of not being recognized as the TRUE voice of the students. Where does it say that another group of people could organize and challenge the SGA's supremacy for student representation.? I know that the SGA is the current end all be all is the eyes of the students and the administration. The SGA is said to be the only recognized voice to the administration. But whose to say if that would be forever?The only way the claim above would prove true is if the Student Government fulfills its commitment to operate as a productive organization. If they fail to live up to that, then anything is up for grabs, including complete dissolution, and starting from scratch. The reason any of this is even being discussed, even though some choice to ignore that there is any problems whatsoever, is the continued troubles of this years SGA. As much as it pains me to admit, the root of the problems must be laid at the feet of the Executive Board.
The current E-Board was elected with such promise, and had such designs of grandeur. The Reconstruction Team vowed to revamp the entire SGA and make improvements on the past few years. The plans were pretty generalized, but there was room and time to fill in the gaps. The problem was that the semester began, the SGA got going, and the plan never took shape. There has been no revamping, there has been virtually nothing going on this semester. Why has the SGA failed to live up the promises they made in April? Maybe the more importan
t question is, why hasn't anyway (besides me) called them out before on their lack of action. I am trying hard to pointing out individual people, so please bear with me. It is not as if I have a personal grudge against them as a group, but rather personally worried about the state of the SGA in their hands.Lets try to run down the list of problems related directly to the Executive Board this year. Maybe the first problem has to do with the actual size of the SGA. In the past year the E-board has increased in size, adding the alumni relations position, and the increased responsibility to the note secretary and the chairperson. No knock on them, but non of these positions are voted in by the students. And I'm sure they have good intentions, but in all honesty they should not wield as much power as they do during this session of the SGA. Its my opinion that an executive board with so much responsibility will function better with a small group of people working in better unison and cohesion, than a large group that has trouble communicating. I am all for diversity in a group and having voices from different perspectives, but when it comes to the E-board, they must be able to function, make decision, provide strong initiative and oversight. The senate is more for the diversity and providing the voice of the people. The executive board should be bringing the issues to the table, and starting the debate. This years e-board is exclusively reactionary, and has not shown the initiative for real CHANGE this year.
One of the other major problems has been the fact that two elected E-Board members served only half of the year. I cannot stress this enough; this is a HUGE PROBLEM. From day one the clock was ticking on these two members, and they were basically lame ducks before October break. It is truly unfair to the student body to try to get yourself elected when you know before hand that you can only serve half a semester. SELFISH is the only way to describe this action. And it doesn't matter how much good work they were able to do before the end of fall semester, because in January they will not be there. New elections were needed in December and now we have two new VP's coming in and having to learn on the job, and mesh with an E-board and senate who has been together since September. There needs to be strict term restrictions for VP's to prevent students who plan to leave mid-semester from being elected. We do the same for students who study abroad in the fall and return for the spring. It is discriminatory to continue that current practice. We shouldn't hate on those wanting to study abroad, but it is only fair to the student population for SGA members to serve a full term (student trustees are chosen knowing they can not go away for two years and must serve their position).
Writing this blog I realize that it is hard to fit everyth
ing in an entry without sounding like a pompous ass or going too long, and losing the audience. I just want to bring to light some serious issues, and I understand it is going to take some serious time and commitment before this comes to be. But for now, I am out. Be safe and be well. 1
Friday, December 26, 2008
IC SGA Vol. 2
The backbone of the Ithaca College Student Govt is the Constitution. I do not claim to know the full history of that document, or can memorize each section as an outside observer, but as
a student I expect every member to know the constitution backwards and forwards. Its not an absurd concept. If you run for student government, if you get elected, if you want to represent the rest of the student body, you need to know the constitution. Why is this relevant? Because it is evident that the senators and even certain executive board members DO NOT know the inner workings of that document. Rather they operate on a cookie cutter meeting setup, with no tangible progress. Members of Congress, their staff, and anyone hanging around must know the ins and outs of every line of the U.S. Constitution. Is it so much to ask, that the IC Student Govt members know the document they are supposed to uphold?
It is truly sad thing to consider. In 2004, the student government completely revamped their composition, changing from being representatives to senators, and added new positions. There was real enthusiasm for what was going on, and these students really cared about being apart of the SGA. In the years that followed the SGA had ups and downs, with some years great things got done, and others it seemed as if the E-board would destroy the whole operation. But this year has shown utter ambivalence. No One cares. Meetings go only as far as the attention spans of 27 (give or take) can take. But why? Why this year does no one care or nothing get done? Its multi faceted.
One major part is the whole committee system, one of the core systems of the SGA. Committee's do the leg work for SGA. Senators, e-board members, and students at large mix it up in different committees to get the grunt work done. The ideals behind the system are sound and have good intentions. A large group will have a difficult time discussing so many issues and planning events or debating campus problems. But split into smaller groups, and even some of them split into smaller subcommittees can accomplish even more, further lifting the burden off of the large group.
What happens however when no one committees the system, and it basically collapses underneath the nose of the entire e-board? Lets leave out Communications and Budget Committee because they probably deserve their own posts. Where has been the progress of the circle shuttle system been? Where has the sustainability issue progress too recently? Where is the SGA relationship with the President Rochon or even Provost Roundtree or any of the deans? (beside our SBPresident's relationship with them? There are dozens of issues that have gone unnoticed this year, and the SGA is OK to let this just fall by the waist side. There are senators who chair committees all by themselves. There are members in committees who have no clue what their group does, when they meet (if at all) and what to update the rest of the SGA about. It is sad really.
There are reports that during SGA meetings that committee updates last few moments and mostly consist of members saying that their group met or didn't and did not have anything pertinent to shar
e. The reports go further and say that during open agenda it takes substantially longer for senators to share upcoming events for other causes and openly advertise to the group. It is sad. Gone seems the day when SGA meetings would last until nearly midnight, because that is how long it would take to go over all the issues, and engage in serious debate. There is no commitment and even when there are sparks of interest or passion on a subject, the timbers are quickly extinguished by the chairperson... in the interest of time. The most damaging statement that can be said during a meeting. Do you think Jefferson turned to Adams during the Constitutional Convention debate about the First Amendment and uttered that phrase and ended the debate? It is silly to even consider, but how many debates have been squelched because of that utterance is unknowable. It just goes to further the claim that no one gives a damn. There is more to say, but it will have to wait for another day (what a rhyme?) Be safe and be well. 1
a student I expect every member to know the constitution backwards and forwards. Its not an absurd concept. If you run for student government, if you get elected, if you want to represent the rest of the student body, you need to know the constitution. Why is this relevant? Because it is evident that the senators and even certain executive board members DO NOT know the inner workings of that document. Rather they operate on a cookie cutter meeting setup, with no tangible progress. Members of Congress, their staff, and anyone hanging around must know the ins and outs of every line of the U.S. Constitution. Is it so much to ask, that the IC Student Govt members know the document they are supposed to uphold?It is truly sad thing to consider. In 2004, the student government completely revamped their composition, changing from being representatives to senators, and added new positions. There was real enthusiasm for what was going on, and these students really cared about being apart of the SGA. In the years that followed the SGA had ups and downs, with some years great things got done, and others it seemed as if the E-board would destroy the whole operation. But this year has shown utter ambivalence. No One cares. Meetings go only as far as the attention spans of 27 (give or take) can take. But why? Why this year does no one care or nothing get done? Its multi faceted.
One major part is the whole committee system, one of the core systems of the SGA. Committee's do the leg work for SGA. Senators, e-board members, and students at large mix it up in different committees to get the grunt work done. The ideals behind the system are sound and have good intentions. A large group will have a difficult time discussing so many issues and planning events or debating campus problems. But split into smaller groups, and even some of them split into smaller subcommittees can accomplish even more, further lifting the burden off of the large group.
What happens however when no one committees the system, and it basically collapses underneath the nose of the entire e-board? Lets leave out Communications and Budget Committee because they probably deserve their own posts. Where has been the progress of the circle shuttle system been? Where has the sustainability issue progress too recently? Where is the SGA relationship with the President Rochon or even Provost Roundtree or any of the deans? (beside our SBPresident's relationship with them? There are dozens of issues that have gone unnoticed this year, and the SGA is OK to let this just fall by the waist side. There are senators who chair committees all by themselves. There are members in committees who have no clue what their group does, when they meet (if at all) and what to update the rest of the SGA about. It is sad really.
There are reports that during SGA meetings that committee updates last few moments and mostly consist of members saying that their group met or didn't and did not have anything pertinent to shar
e. The reports go further and say that during open agenda it takes substantially longer for senators to share upcoming events for other causes and openly advertise to the group. It is sad. Gone seems the day when SGA meetings would last until nearly midnight, because that is how long it would take to go over all the issues, and engage in serious debate. There is no commitment and even when there are sparks of interest or passion on a subject, the timbers are quickly extinguished by the chairperson... in the interest of time. The most damaging statement that can be said during a meeting. Do you think Jefferson turned to Adams during the Constitutional Convention debate about the First Amendment and uttered that phrase and ended the debate? It is silly to even consider, but how many debates have been squelched because of that utterance is unknowable. It just goes to further the claim that no one gives a damn. There is more to say, but it will have to wait for another day (what a rhyme?) Be safe and be well. 1Monday, December 22, 2008
IC SGA Vol. 1
This is the inaugural IC Watchdog blog post, so lets do it big, Obama style. There is a lot to be said about what goes on here on South Hill, that is not being said. The Ithacan, IMprint, ICTV, and Buzzsaw only do so much. I am not sure if the political correctness of it all, or the fact that faculty and administration is looking over everyone shoulders so that some real opinion does not come through. The closest I saw to to this type of action was at the beginning of the year in an editorial in the Ithacan, taking a shot at the Student Government Association.
To be fair though, this was actually a cheap shot on the SGA. How can you criticize them the first week of school when they have never even had the chance to meet? It was actually reckless of however wrote that article (and I know who it was) as well as the editors who allowed that to print, along with the cartoon that adjoined it. The real failure of this has been the lack of voice from The Ithacan in the weeks and months that followed. Where have these critics been since early September? Had that article been written in early November, I would have cheered it for taking a chance and telling the truth, when everyone seems more worried about putting out a good image. An article asking why hasn't the SGA fulfilled the promises they made last semester, or a lack of any productivity whatsoever should be commended for its boldness!
There are soooo many problems with the student government this year it is hard to list them all together. I'll do my best throughout this blog, to bring these problems to light, so I beg for patience. One of the biggest problems this year has been the way the meetings have been run. The main purpose is not to discuss issues, or go over committee/officer updates, but rather TO GET OUT OF THERE!!! It is disgusting. Here are 9 Executive Board members (5 who were voted in by the student body, and 4 appointees) and 20-odd senators voted in by their constituents on campus, and the biggest item discussed every week is who gets to motion to adjourn the meeting. The majority of this blame has to fall on the chairperson. Without question, this individual has instituted this get out of dodge mentality and the senators have been willing to follow without question. A chairperson, who was not voted by the students, yet claims the most power during the meetings (yes, even more than the President). In short, she is so unqualified to hold the position, and is doing so much damage to the productivity of SGA it is scary.
In future posts I plan on outlining all of the problems on South Hill, including the problems our the student government. Check back for updates. Be well, and be safe. 1
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
