The ASSU Undergraduate Senate broke down into tense, heated discussions at multiple points in Tuesday evening’s meeting. A bill to admonish several members of the ASSU may or may not have passed due to an unresolved debate concerning the Senate bylaws. Senate Chair Rafael Vazquez ’12 announced the measure’s failure before the meeting adjourned, but proponents of the bill argue that the bill passed with a majority of voting members.

 

A bill to admonish

 

The controversial bill of the evening, authored by Elections Commissioner Adam Adler ’12 sought to admonish ASSU Executive Michael Cruz ’12, among others, for not properly executing their duties. The only Senator who would be admonished by the bill, Alex Kindel ’14 voted in its favor.

 

The original vote count on the bill was five in favor, three opposed and five abstaining, however this did not add up to the 14 Senators currently present, and multiple irregularities were noted by several senators.

 

Stephen Trusheim ’13, who is not an ASSU senator and served last year as Elections Commissioner, pointed out several flaws in the voting procedure.

 

Vazquez quieted discussion loudly and called another vote, this time resulting in five in favor, four opposed and five abstaining. The bill’s language stated that it required “a simple majority” from the voting body to pass. Several Senators argued that the bill did not pass because the bylaws state that a majority of present Senators is required, as opposed to a majority of voting members.

 

However, the bylaws of the Undergraduate Senate state: “Unless otherwise indicated, all votes by the US (Undergraduate Senate), or a standing committee thereof, shall be by a majority of those members present and voting.”

 

In an interview after the meeting, Vazquez initially agreed that abstentions were not votes, and according to this language, the bill should have passed. Vazquez said the bill was amended to require a two-thirds majority before passage. This proved to be untrue however.

 

Vazquez later said that an “abstain” counts as a vote in the Undergraduate Senate. Random House Dictionary defines an abstention as a “withholding of a vote.”

 

Vazquez said the passage of the bill does not matter, even to Adler, and if it did he would look into the matter more fully. Adler agreed with this sentiment, saying the admonishment already had occurred by having the vote and introducing the bill. However Adler said he believes the bill did indeed pass.

 

“It’s not something I’d bring to the Constitutional Council, but I am interested in how this turns out,” Adler said.

 

Leadership Development Program

 

The Senate also discussed the involvement – or lack thereof – of Senate Associates in the Leadership Development Program (LDP).

 

A tense debate occurred an hour into the meeting when Senate Deputy Chair Dan Ashton ’14 gave an update about the LDP, a program that assigns each Senator a freshman to mentor and teach about ASSU leadership.

 

Members of the LDP have attended one full Senate meeting, however Senators Dan DeLong ’13, Janani Ramachandran ’14, Ian Chan ’14 and Ben Laufer ’12 all raised concerns about the level of involvement of the members.

 

Ashton said that attending Senate meetings was no longer mandatory because of feedback he received in surveys from last year’s program, when LDP associates had to attend meetings.

 

Ramachandran noted that as a Senate Associate, she benefited from attending meetings, which were mandatory last year.

 

“With all due respect, I’d like to counter that,” Ashton said. “I read the surveys, and you were the only one who responded that going to committee meetings was beneficial.”

 

Senators began to talk over each other following this comment, with Senator Alon Elhanan ’14 twice saying, “That was awesome,” and Senator Dan Delong asking, “Aren’t those supposed to be confidential?”

 

Senate Chair Rafael Vazquez ’12 ended discussion on the matter and told Senators to reach out to their Senate Associates and encourage them to be more involved.

 

Other bills

 

Several other bills were passed during the meeting. Ashton authored a bill that would authorize a letter to be disseminated encouraging the Stanford University Department of Public Safety (SUDPS) to avoid violence when dispersing any protests on Stanford University.

 

Nanci Howe, director of Student Activities and Leadership (SAL), suggested the bill focus on how students feel the police should act with “mutual respect,” rather than focusing on what actions they want the police to avoid. The amendment was accepted by Ashton.

 

Another bill, authored by Trusheim, focused on planning a spring show in Frost Amphitheater. The bill asked for supplementary funding from the ASSU “special buffer fund,” which is currently valued at $400,000. The bill requested $35,000 for the event, which is projected to cost over $250,000.

 

Discussion over this bill will continue at future Senate meetings.

 

The Senate also passed an additional bill by Adler, which made slight clarifications to other sections of the bylaws and approved his nominations to the Elections Commission.