College Media Network - Search the largest news resource for college students by college students

Ross, Senate debate nomination process

President to veto bill that requires rapid cabinet appointments

By Josh Dawsey
Assistant News Editor

Print this article

Published: Wednesday, November 4, 2009

Updated: Wednesday, November 4, 2009

ROSS

Hannah Carroll / THE DAILY GAMECOCK

Student Body President Meredith Ross plans to veto a bill that would require her to appoint all members of her cabinet just three weeks after her inauguration.

Two bills that would change Student Government’s nomination process to its executive cabinet were discussed on Wednesday night, but it’s not definite whether either will make it into the body’s codes.

Legislation from Sen. Matt Ungar that would require Student Body President Meredith Ross to appoint her entire cabinet within three weeks of her inauguration was approved by the body in a 23-2 vote, but Ross is likely to veto the bill.

Another bill proposed by Ungar that would require the entire Student Senate to vote on every nomination to the president’s executive cabinet, even if a Senate committee votes unfavorably on a nominee, was tabled in a 14-12 vote by the body.

But Ungar, along with Sen. Ben Bullock, are working on revisions and hope to bring the bill up for debate again in the upcoming weeks.

The legislation forcing the Student Body President to fill the cabinet within weeks didn’t bring contentious debate in the Senate, but Ross devoted much of her report to explaining her opposition.

“It doesn’t behoove any president to leave positions open in a cabinet,” Ross, a fourth-year political science student, said. “It could leave the president nominating someone he or she didn’t feel was qualified to meet the requirement.”

In her report prior to the vote, Ross all but guaranteed a veto. 

But an amendment by Sen. Ben Bullock that would give Senate power to grant time extensions when deemed necessary by the body led her to say she wasn’t sure whether or not she’d use her veto power for the first time.

Senators could overturn Ross’s veto with a two-thirds vote, but Ross isn’t sure they would.

“If I vetoed a bill, there’s not telling how senators would vote after a measure like that was taken,” she said. “I think it sends a pretty strong message.”

The legislation that would require a Senate vote on every cabinet nominee brought more heated conversation.

Currently, a Senate committee can deny a nomination after interviewing the person.  If the committee reports unfavorably, there is no vote of the full senate, and the application is dead.

“This legislation would have given every senator a chance to ask questions of a nominee,” Sen. Matt Ungar, the bill’s sponsor, said.

But multiple senators, including Sen. Andrew Graczyk, said the bill serves no purpose.

“The reason we have the committees is so we don’t bring everything to the floor of the Senate,” the third-year physics student said. “We run the risk of canceling out the entire need of having the committee.”

Last month, Morgan Henley, an applicant for the position of Secretary of Environmental Affairs, was denied a place in Student Government by the Committee of Environmental Affairs.

Henley’s nomination has been shrouded in controversy. Initially, the Powers and Responsibility committee interviewed Henley and found her unqualified for the position. 
Senate leadership then realized it had mangled the process, and the nomination was sent to the Environmental Affairs committee for consideration. Henley was once again voted down.

“She was definitely qualified for the position,” Ross said. “I’m still unclear as to why she was voted down.”

During the weeks of the application process, Henley began work with various environmental groups and met with different leaders on campus, Ross said. Ross has now given Henley an unpaid staff position in the executive branch and praised her for her ongoing projects.

Sen. Kate Allison, the chairwoman of the Environmental Affairs, wasn’t at Wednesday’s meeting and could not be reached for comment by The Daily Gamecock.

Henley said the interview went well, but she thinks the Senate “wanted their own person.”  An application from current Sen. Liz Elliott for the position has been received by Ross, but it’s not clear whether or not Elliott will actually become the next secretary.

 

SENATE QUICK HITS

All four bills for debate during Wednesday night’s Senate session were brought by Sen. Matt Ungar, leading Ungar to chastise other Senators for not being more involved.

“I’ve been up here four times, and that’s uncalled for,” Ungar said. “I want every Senator to find something they’re passionate about and make a change.”

Ungar’s two other bills were passed unanimously by the body. The first re-allocated money in Student Government’s budget, which is fairly common for the body during the year. His second piece of legislation asked the University to improve the quality of intersections on campus, saying student safety could be drastically improved.

Comments

2 comments
Brad Maxwell
Thu Nov 5 2009 16:47
Kate-

I'm not sure what in this article you would deem "unfactual". Looking solely at the last few paragraphs of the article that refer to Morgan's interview process, the reporter strictly uses quotes and paraphrasing from what Meredith and Morgan have said. The did in fact say those things -- factual. The reporter did in fact TRY to get in touch with you with the number that was available to him, the fact that your cell phone number is not available (to which you sound kind of ok with, which makes it sound like you didn't want to be contacted...because I'd bet money that the reporter identified himself over the phone as a reporter for The Daily Gamecock, not a random stranger), what was the reporter then to do if your phone number was not available to him? It says "you could not be reached for comment". Sounds to me from what you say, that...wait..."you could not be reached for comment." Th comment "wanted our own person" was a direct quote...so not "condescendingly written" as you put it. The reporter really did very little if ANY skewing of the story. He reported what the people directly involved think about the situation and made an effort to get both sides of the story. I would agree, a follow up is probably necessary...but honestly....this article is pretty fair and accurate.

And you know what...this is totally news. I'm sorry its not "nice" and makes you feel good inside. You're student GOVERNMENT for crying out loud. There is going to be disagreements, there is going to be bickering. And its the newspaper's job to let the students know what's going on on the inside, and lets be real -- its not always nice. I agree -- you guys DO do some great stuff, and I respect yall a lot -- but again... let's not sit here and say its all rays of sunshine.

Oh. And I seek a "factual answer," as you call it. Why was Morgan found unqualified? Meredith says she was, what's your take?

Kate Allison
Thu Nov 5 2009 01:26
First off, today I was not in Senate because I had to interview applicants from 5-7. I was unable to be reached for a comment because I was not called. My house in Statesville was called, but my mother being the wonderful woman she is opted not to give out my cell phone number to strangers. On behalf of myself, not of Student Government, I would like to make the point that much of what is said in this article is purely hearsay. No one can tell you why exactly my committee voted the nominee for Secretary of Environmental Affairs down except for me or a member of my committee. Ask any of us personally and we would be happy to inform you. It was not because we "wanted our own person" as it was so condescendingly written. We have interviews for a reason, and if someone is not voted into Student Government it does not mean there is something wrong, it means that there are members that care enough about the body that they wish to fill the positions with the best possible applicants. I am completely open to anyone with questions that seek factual answers.

I love Student Government, I am part of this organization only because I wish to see a better Carolina and deeply believe in the passion of my members. Highlighting us in such a light is not letting the school know of how hard we work, how late we stay, how much we care, it is only tearing us apart. So please, get the facts straight. There are so many wonderful people that do this for the pure thought that they could make a difference, those are the people that need to be recognized. We should be one body that wishes to succeed, not broken pieces fighting each other's success.







log out