Senate system would better serve overall student body in USAC
By Asad Ramzanali
March 2, 2011 12:19 a.m.
On Tuesday night, Undergraduate Students Association Council members voted against a proposal that would change how general representatives are elected, after much debate on the topic.
The decision means that students will continue to rank general representatives on USAC ballots.
The failed proposal would have streamlined the system, allowing students to simply pick three representatives from the pool of candidates.
But in this discussion, a much bigger question was missed: Why do we have general representatives at all? The three general representatives are each responsible for reflecting the views of 26,000 students, an impossible task considering the diversity of opinions at UCLA.
For better representation, we need a senate within our student government that can actually reflect students’ views.
Currently, USAC has 13 members who are elected by students: three executive members, three general representatives and seven subject-specific commissioners.
A better system would eliminate the general representatives and add a 20-member senate as the legislature. It would also move the president, vice presidents and subject-specific council members to a separate executive branch.
The senate system has been proposed a number of times starting in the 1960s. In the last decade, it has been discussed every few years and seems to have support, but has always come across some snag in the process.
These proposals have largely centered on having 20 or so at-large members of the senate. If 40 people ran for those seats, not many students would read up on 40 candidates. This would become even more of a popularity contest than the current system.
The senate should be comprised of seats representing specific segments of the student body. The first category of senate members would represent students by major and year. Third-year North Campus students would get one representative, and so would second-year South Campus students. After adding fifth-year members and two undecided-major representatives, this would comprise twelve seats.
The second category would be based on residence: the Hill would get two representatives, Greek houses would get one and apartment students would get two. Hill and apartment students would not vote on two representatives each, but would be split into two districts each, so everyone votes on the same number of representatives.
To round out the 20-member senate, there would be three at-large seats that anyone could run for.
The exact breakdown of how many seats each group should have is flexible, but having most of the senators represent specific parts of the student body would lead to healthy debate in which students’ voices are actually represented.
This would also lead to a better representation for South Campus students on the council, a topic that students often complain about.
A senate would also cause a decline in power of the current slates while encouraging the formation of other parties, slates and coalitions.
While I think a multi-party system would be healthier for political debate, this is likely one of the reasons the current council may not like the proposal: most of them are affiliated with one of the two slates at UCLA, Bruins United or Students First!, which would both lose power in a senate system.
To change student government this drastically, the constitution would have to be amended. This can be done in one of two ways: two-thirds of the council votes for the change or 15 percent of the student body signs a petition to put the matter to a general student vote.
The two-party system we have leads to finger-pointing and politicizing of nearly all discussions. A multi-party system would lead to more compromise as smaller parties need coalitions and partners to get a majority vote on any issue. This system would also increase the representation of students’ voices in their government.
The merit of a 13-member council is that it is more effective and efficient than a 20-member legislature. But I’m willing to forego that central effectiveness for more debate, a greater diversity of voices and a more representative form of student government.
Think we should disband USAC? E-mail Ramzanali at [email protected]. Send general comments to [email protected].
