Student body needs to voice opinion on ROTC

The USG voted Sunday to table a proposed nondiscrimination amendment to its constitution. The proposed amendment will, after revision, be reintroduced at a later Senate meeting for further discussion. The future of the referendum about the propriety of the ROTC program's presence on campus, which preceeded the amendment, remains uncertain — it will resurface during the USG fall elections at the earliest.

We hope these events will not signal the end of campus debate on these issues, but instead mark the beginning of a sustained effort to understand and come to terms with the situation at hand. The delay of the referendum is not a defeat or a victory for either side in this debate. Instead, it is an opportunity for the University community to continue to engage in an informed discussion on this topic.

The decision of whether to allow ROTC and military recruiters on campus is not a simple or easy one. Values of nondiscrimination and the importance of serving one's country in the military are central to this debate. But there are also legal issues involved — most notably, the Solomon Amendment, which allows for the denial of federal funding to institutions of higher education if they prohibit or prevent ROTC or military recruiting on campus. This amendment has been struck down by the Third Circuit Court of Appeals, but this ruling could very well be taken up by the Supreme Court later this year and overturned. Where will we stand as a student body stand if the amendment is upheld and our decision to remove ROTC or recruiters could cost us our federal funding?

This is not to say that matters like the Solomon Amendment should automatically change the moral calculus we employ when dealing with this issue. However, in order to be taken seriously by the administration, students must understand these complications and nuances before making a final decision. We also need to understand where the administration and University policy currently stand on this matter and why. The extra time will allow the campus to learn about these issues, and consequently strengthen whatever stance is finally chosen by the student body.

To that end, it is necessary that the referendum which initated this debate not be delayed indefinitely, but come up on the fall ballot. While there is a value to the student body taking time to research and discuss an issue, at some point this debate must reach a conclusion. This vote is necessary to make the opinion of the student body clear to the University's leaders, who are ultimately responsible for making the final decision on the future of military recruiting and ROTC on campus. With an issue as important as this, the voice of the student body must be heard.