The petition in question calls for the student body to be polled on its opinion of the current University administration. The sweeping nature of the questions have prompted members of the USG to raise concerns about the prudence of placing the questions on the ballot. Some members have also worried that the questions could damage the USG's relationship with the administration. How students will respond to the questions and what the implications of these responses will be for the USG remains to be seen, but the USG has already embarrassed itself by failing to include in its own constitution the amendment adopted to address the rules governing petitions. Without a clear and transparent constitution, the USG risks being viewed by students as an incompetent cabal uninterested in effectively representing students' interests.
In this case, many USG officers doubt whether including the referendum on the election ballot would further student interests. The relevant amendment, had it been incorporated into the published constitution, would have allowed the USG's senate to declare the petition frivolous if five-sixths of its members voted to exclude it from the ballot. But even had the amendment been in place, the USG would not have been likely to make this determination. While the questions posed may be vague and inflammatory, they address the important issue of student input in administrative decisions. To have deemed the petition frivolous would have gone too far.
That a petition could appear on the ballot even in the face of serious doubts as to its efficacy suggests that the amendment regarding petitions should be revised. The standard that a petition must be considered frivolous to be excluded from the ballot limits the ability of the USG to exercise its judgment in determining how best to address student concerns. In cases like this one, in which the petition is not frivolous but flawed, the USG should be able to veto the placement of the petition on the ballot. If five-sixths of the USG agrees that a referendum does not meaningfully advance the interests of the student body, then the USG should be able to exclude the petition from the ballot. The current supermajority requirement ensures that students' voices will continue to be heard and should remain. But the change in the standard for exclusion would give the USG more latitude to represent students in the manner most likely to result in change on the part of the administration.
Read More
Why can’t lecturers win the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching?
Jerry ZhuLet’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Let’s acknowledge those who make “boutique teaching” possible, those who work tirelessly to make our rigorous curricula more accessible, and those who dedicate their time to advising and guiding us through all the challenges we face at this University. Lecturers should be eligible for the President’s Award for Distinguished Teaching.
Princeton’s administration of justice is Trumpian
Frances BroganThe disparity between the University’s approach to Giberson and its approach to pro-Palestinian protestors reflects a concerning trend of appeasing an increasingly emboldened right rather than resisting the threat it poses to academic freedom and the wellbeing of Princeton students.
Secular Opening Exercises? Don’t throw out the baby with the bath water
Frank StrasburgerThe secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
The secular makes no room for the spiritual. What Opening Exercises are meant to convey is the spirit of the institution so that it may be kept alive from generation to generation.
