OCR Text |
Show Editorial JFrong Agaiin Associated Men Students are in deep hot water again, ' but this time we can't support them. As a result of elec-, elec-, tion violations and a recent mixup on a group the AMS : officers had improperly invited to appear on campus, Stu- dent Regulations Committee put the organization on pro-' pro-' bation for one year. While the probationary status will not limit the activities ac-tivities of AMS, it will place them under the heavy scru-; scru-; intiny the organization has needed for some time. In 1 addition, Student Regulations Committee recommended that rather than being given a blanket appropriation, the AMS be given money only as it is needed. This would solve many problems. Take, for example, the AMS mixup on citizenship awards. We supported the AMS officers at the time because be-cause we felt they were not at fault. They were faced with an outdated constitution and set of bylaws and were trying to operate under an ASUU constitution that made no mention of them whatsoever. They were given $300 at the start of the year, and as far as they knew the only responsibility they had was to pick four people they considered con-sidered to be good citizens and give them awards. If, during the coming year, AMS is given a viable, up-to-date constitution and a serious look is taken at the manner in which the group is given money, these problems should be taken care of. We feel that the Student Regulations Committee acted wisely on the matter of AMS. In fact, we are pleased that they acted at all. That was another of our gripes at the way the last AMS was handled. It seemed to us that if AMS had been amiss, the group to handle it should, have been the group designated as judiciary in the new constitution rather than the Executive Council. One of the most confusing parts of the former business was that the Executive Council was complaining mainly that AMS had not followed procedures and at the same time was not very strictly following a different, less amorphous set of procedures. The current AMS officers should have been forewarned. fore-warned. They must have had some idea that as a result of their predecessors' troubles, the powers-that-be and the campus as a whole would be keeping a pretty sharp eye on them. But rather than following the wiser course of playing the game according to the rules, staying out of trouble and cleaning their own house, they proceeded to break the rules even as they were being elected. As soon as they were in office practically, they broke another rule. And when they were caught in their petty rule breaking, they took a defensive stance refusing to admit they were in the wrong. They may have thought they could get away as the previous officers did; they should have known better. They should have realized that people in authority become more wary after a loss more careful of how they proceed the next time. But not only the AMS officers are at fault. Also at fault are the old officers, who could have made them wary of contravening the rules, or who could have pointed out some areas in which changes were needed. Also remiss are the committee that wrote the new constitution and the people who voted for it and the Chronicle, for not insisting that something be said in the constitution about such groups as AMS and Associated Women Students. It seems that some provision ought to have been made for communication among the three largest larg-est groups on campus. After all, as men and women, we're all members of Associated students. Hadn't our various officers ought to get in touch with one another? We would suggest that several things be done. First, the AMS constitution should be revamped and brought up to date. Second, the AWS setup should be examined so that that group will not fall into the same pitfalls as AMS has. Third, we would recommend that Executive Council draft an amendment to the constitution for referendum refer-endum as sooi, as possible after the beginning of Fall Quarter. This amendment would make allowance for AMS and AWS and Residence Halls Association and the two Greek governing bodies. The amendment need not put these organizations under control of ASUU, but it ought at least recognize them and provide for communication, communi-cation, if not cooperation. So, with these suggestions, we write finis to our seventy-fifth year of editorial freedom. |