USG finds constitutional amendment

referendum

"The USG uncovered the previously-discussed constitutional amendment giving the Senate the power to deem a referendum frivolous by a 5/6th vote," USG communications director Andrew Malcolm '09 said in an e-mail after the conclusion of a meeting of the USG Executive Committee (ExCom). "The constitution will be updated to reflect this change, but it will not be applicable to this election," he added, referring to the upcoming USG spring elections.

The constitution currently states that a petition with 200 undergraduate signatures would qualify a referendum for placement "on the ballot of the nearest coming USG election," a stipulation that Kyle Smith '09, the author of the current referendum, has met. This means that Smith's referendum will be placed on the election ballot.

USG president Josh Weinstein '09 said in an e-mail that "given that the constitution with the old amendment has not been publicly accessible for the past year and a half, in particular not to Smith, it would not be fair for us to apply those restrictions to this petition."

"[Smith] acted in response to the posted constitution ... and as such, going back on the posted constitution now would simply be unethical," U-Council chair Sarah Langberg '09 said in an e-mail before the meeting.

The amendment allows the USG Senate to declare proposed referenda "frivolous" with a five-sixths majority. It was approved by the USG Senate in October 2006.

The ExCom also decided that the USG will not place a disclaimer on the referendum, an issue that was discussed at Sunday night's USG Senate meeting.

"The referendum will go on the ballot as submitted by Kyle Smith," Malcolm said. "There will be no USG-written introduction or disclaimer. Again, the referendum was a student sponsored initiative, and the USG is taking no stance on it."

Class of 2009 senator Bruce Halperin had said before the meeting that he worried including the referendum on the ballot would indicate "almost tacit USG approval" of Smith's proposal. He had said that the referendum should include a disclaimer from the USG.

Implications of the referendum

The decisions by the ExCom came after debate among USG members over whether the referendum could damage its relationship with the University administration.

"I would have liked to see a petition ... with more substantive questions about specific questions about the administration" so that the referendum was not just an attack on the administration, U-Councilor Maria Salciccioli '09 said. Salciccioli is also a blogger for The Daily Princetonian.

Get the best of the ‘Prince’ delivered straight to your inbox. Subscribe now »

USG vice president Mike Wang '10 said that at Sunday's meeting, the USG Senate questioned the effectiveness of the questions posed by Smith.

"The discussion [at the Senate meeting] was more geared to whether or not this was of substance and whether it would have a real effect on student life here," he said, but added that "everyone values student input."

At the Senate meeting, Associate Dean of Undergraduate Students Thomas Dunne expressed disapproval of the petition. Dunne said the petition was "poorly constructed" and "assumes this is the only way students can conduct concerns." He was also concerned about the low "threshold" for signatures to place the petition as a referendum on the ballot.

USG academics chair Ben Lund '10 objected to Smith's referendum as a misuse of a tool to poll the student body.

"I think that what Kyle wants to put on the USG ballot does not constitute a referendum," he said in an e-mail before the ExCom meeting. "In my view, a referendum necessitates action and, although I believe his concerns are important, his series of questions seems more like a poll," he added.

Weinstein stressed that the USG's reservations about the petition do not represent an attempt to "block the student body from expressing its opinion ... we were discussing whether or not we thought the referendum was a constructive means of achieving our goal of representing the student voice to the administration, but a referendum is a chance for the student body to drive the USG - not vice versa."

"It would not have been shot down [by the Senate], though we may have had suggestions for improvement," he said.

Weinstein added that he does not believe the referendum will damage the USG's relationship with the administration.

"I don't imagine a [student-initiated] referendum in the form of a survey on the USG ballot [will be] damaging [to] the working relationship that the USG has developed [with the administration]," he said.