Student Government says its members “spend countless hours ensuring that the needs of students are met.”
But SG spent more hours during Senate meetings this semester tweaking its internal workings than debating legislation pertaining to students.
SG Senators spent more than 33 hours   meeting in the Capital Chambers this semester. About 30 percent, or 10 hours, was devoted to student interest, while about 58 percent was spent on internal changes and about 12 percent was dedicated to meeting procedure.
The Daily Reveille classifies SG Senate meeting time into three categories: time spent on meeting procedure like roll call; time spent debating legislation that affects students; and time spent debating legislation and reporting on events with interest to SG but little or no direct student impact.
SG debated resolutions and bills directly and indirectly affecting students in nearly 10 hours of student-related action. Funding bills, such as allocating money to the Veterinary Medicine Association and the Center for Community Engagement, Learning & Leadership, correlate to student interest.
Several resolutions debated on the Senate floor also affected students because they “urge and request” entities to change something affecting students. This includes a resolution to endorse the Flagship Coalition and SG’s Spectrum-inspired debate to add gender identity and expression to the University’s equal opportunity policy’s non-discrimination clause.
SG’s controversial black caucus debate is also identified as pertaining to students because while the caucus appears to relate to SG internal operations, the caucus surfaced because black students felt underrepresented in SG.
The senators spent 58 percent of their time debating and reporting on legislation mostly pertaining to SG, including updating the University Court’s Rules of Court, changing the process by which the U-Court can injunct legislation and spending a series of meetings altering the black caucus bylaws.
SG meetings include executive officer reports where SG’s president and vice president speak, committee reports when each Senate committee gives updates, judicial officer reports when the U-Court chief justice discusses the court and legislative officer reports, when the speaker and speaker pro tempore address the chamber. These reports were usually aimed toward SG, though former President J Hudson and Vice President Dani Borel’s executive reports often discussed the needs of students in their initiative updates.
The final nearly 12 percent of the Senate’s time was spent on typical meeting procedure like roll call, inductions, resignations and public input.
Brooksie Bonvillain, this year’s Senate speaker, said SG made “a lot” of progress limiting time on the floor. She said former Senate Speaker Tyler Martin passed legislation limiting time per person on debate, public input and petitions, memorials and other communication, though senators can move to suspend the rules and limit or extend debate by a two-thirds vote.
Bonvillain and Aaron Caffarel, this year’s speaker pro tempore and next year’s speaker, said they would not feel comfortable cutting off anyone who wishes to debate. Bonvillain said the Senate’s goal is to make sure everyone is informed, and she would rather spend time doing so instead of “rushing and compromising integrity.”
Caffarel said debates about important initiatives for students are usually the shortest because senators are more likely to pass legislation directing positive change to students.
Bonvillain said the Senate’s primary goal is efficiency and the secondary goal is fairness when changing documents, and Caffarel agreed efficiency is the goal in revisions. She said the Rules of Court and Election Code revisions affect students because the writing in the documents was previously too legalistic.
Caffarel said time is not the correct way to measure effectiveness, and he would instead “look at the intent of legislation and potential for affecting change.”
Caffarel cited Senate leadership not ruling legislation as causing backward motion in debate and lack of student feedback as reasons for lengthy debate seemingly unrelated to students.
“We probably could have done a better job of ruling things dilatory,” he said about re-debating black caucus bylaws, though he said he cannot control legislation a senator writes.
He said with more student feedback, the Senate could become more of a catalyst for change.
“There’s only so much that any given person can change when they’re not told what the problems are,” Caffarel said.
 
 
____
Contact Andrea Gallo at [email protected]