Checks and Balances

Our Student Association is a corrupt organization filled with liars and thieves. That's what some students say, anyway.

Are all the rumors true? Probably not. The student body may never know all the inner workings of SA, but there are some things we know for certain: one, in Dela Yador, this year we have a competent SA president. And two, despite Dela's competence, the role of SA is again brought into question by the still unfolding charges against his party in last spring's election, Elevation '05.

Specifically, two uncomfortable issues have ventured to the forefront of the controversy: conflict of interest, and checks and balances.

The most common vibe described by concerned students is the alleged self-serving and elitist nature of SA.

Josh Hyman, president of the statewide SUNY SA, may have hit the nail on the head when he said there's an old school of students that "really believes the position is about privilege." Though he wasn't referring specifically to UB, what he identified is a concern shared by more than a few UB students.

Doubts surfaced most strongly two years ago, during George Pape's administration. During both semesters, you could find flyers in many a hallway ripping into SA officials for spending student funds on pricey cars and trips.

Whether or not those accusations were true, it's important to remember that mistakes made in the past were just that: mistakes. In the past. Let's give this year's E-board a chance to prove themselves before we point fingers, shall we?

But in light of Matthew Pelkey's charges of bribery and dishonesty against Treasurer Mazin Kazed and the Elevation party, perhaps a good look at our student government structure is in order.

Last semester, Pelkey and his party, Reform Our Campus, filed charges against Kased for trying to bribe Pelkey's running mate for SUNY SA delegate. According to the rules, Pelkey's charges first to the Election and Credentials Committee.

But the E&C is a subdivision of SA. It is a conflict of interest that the people to whom Pelkey brings his complaints are practically the ones he's complaining about.

Before the Student-Wide Judiciary - an objective, non-SA-affiliated decision-making organization - can get involved, the E&C needs to make a decision. But that's taken months now and Pelkey plans on petitioning his way straight to the SWJ via the threat of impeachment.

A clear solution, here, is to put the SWJ in charge of the E&C. That would create an objective organization reviewing concerns brought about SA.

While we're at it, why keep the SWJ in the small role it currently inhabits? This organization is UB's chance to rein in a group that has a history of legal complaints from students.

When asked about SWJ expanding its influence, Chief Justice Bill Sherlock said it's just not a possibility right now. "Expanding would probably cost some money, since a lot of our positions are volunteer-only." SWJ can't afford to get any bigger, with so few students participating. Is student apathy, then, to blame for the issues raised by concerned students?

The SWJ could also be the organization to review SA's budget, rather than Sub-Board. This is another opportunity for a non-SA organization to objectively review the actions of the most influential and prominent student organization on campus.

Similarly, Pelkey plans on proposing to the Student Assembly a student position similar to district attorneys, supervised by SWJ. These "SWJ attorneys" could also play a role in the checks and balances of SA, in addition to giving undergraduates valuable law experience.

Each year, SA and its E-board do their share of positive events and programs. They help you with homework, organize concert fests, run the book exchange, and get sports clubs free trainers. An organization founded with the intent of serving students can't be out to get you.

But people like Pelkey, who describes all of it as a "glamorously-painted picture for the students to see that just isn't true," remind us that a student government is subject to making mistakes just like any government. And that a fair system is difficult to achieve.

Maybe Sherlock is right when he says the real problem is that students gripe, but they are apathetic. Until those who make the complaints and accusations are ready to help solve them, all we can do is wait and watch Pelkey take on Elevation '05.