The following is excerpted from a Pipe Dream editorial from Nov. 6, 1998. The Binghamton University Student Association president at the time, Ben Greenzweig, had just introduced a new constitution to the Assembly.
“Dear Student Association representatives,
“We’re not claiming a new constitution is a bad idea — actually, a revision is long overdue — but any major changes deserves a lot of time and consideration. The whole procedure already seems rushed, and as reps you shouldn’t feel compelled to ratify the constitution until you feel satisfied. And there are some changes that merit interrogation and investigation.
“Pay attention and speak up Tuesday night. And if you don’t feel ready or educated enough to make decisions, don’t hesitate to postpone the debate. There’s no point in passing a constitution that needs to be revised again in five years because the vote was rushed and uninformed.
“Take your time.”
Then-President Greenzweig, in an op/ed piece for the same issue, described the moment: “This constitution has been one year in the making, and offered several new and innovative ideas for the operations and procedures of student government.” He continued, “This new constitution is perhaps the single most important piece of business that has been brought to the Assembly in the four years I have been here.”
Looking back, it was a pretty big deal, we guess.
Greenzweig aimed to make the annual SA budget crisis a thing of the past. The 1998 constitutional changes included the creation of the Financial Council we know and love today, which was combined from the once-separate Finance and Budget committees in a streamlining effort. Harpur Ferry’s funding became an automatic allocation from the student activity fee, same as today. The constitution set aside thousands of extra dollars for community governments and SA groups. It also added more representatives to the Assembly.
Jump back to the future.
Just yesterday, our current SA leaders decided to unveil their own constitutional overhaul. And it makes Greenzweig’s “most important piece of business” look like a nonbinding resolution that explores the possibility of providing free hot chocolate at the Hinman Dining Hall.
As part of the new legislation, today’s SA would become SA, Inc. — an officially incorporated not-for-profit business. Our student government’s nearly unique autonomy from the University would be set in stone. But that’s not all.
The new constitution would — we swear — destroy our Assembly. If passed, the SA’s roughly 50-member legislative branch simply wouldn’t exist. Its powers would be delegated between a new Representative Council and strengthened existing committees.
Those are the headlining changes in an entirely rewritten constitution, but there are others we won’t even bother getting into just yet. See, with less than a week before the Assembly votes whether to essentially kill itself — a vote where the SA needs a two-thirds majority to move this thing forward — the specifics aren’t even set.
The SA leadership took only two weeks to completely revamp the constitution — compared to an entire year spent combining two committees and moving some money around in 1998 — and the week ahead will be spent reworking the first draft, before a final vote next Monday. The leadership claims that the short time period is necessary, because the University only recently gave the go-ahead and the new constitution needs to be passed by a campus-wide ballot referendum (attached to E-Board elections for next year) in two weeks.
We’ll reserve judgement on the new constitution until it’s finalized. But we’re sure about one thing.
The whole procedure already seems rushed.