|
AristoCAPs?
By Tyson Roan,
Editorial Board Director
At their last meeting, the
SGA appointed three members, two of whom were freshmen Capital
Scholars. This adds two more Capital Scholars to a government
already supersaturated with CAP students. According to an article
in last week’s Journal, the two freshmen were appointed
because no one else applied for the positions.
Now, nine of the sixteen
available positions are held by Capital Scholars, who represent
less than one-tenth of the campus community.
The recently revised
Constitution requires that vacancies in offices must be advertised
across campus for at least two weeks. Ads ran in the UIS Journal,
flyers were placed throughout campus, and the SGA advertised the
position on its Web site.
Still, the SGA relied
chiefly upon word of mouth. The freshmen were appointed through a
system of cronyism where CAP Scholar representation begat CAP
Scholar representation. And on top of the SGA positions
themselves, because President Steube is granted the authority to
appoint students to important campus committees, an overwhelming
majority of his appointments have gone to CAP Scholars.
Capital Scholars are not to
blame for the underrepresented majority of transfer and graduate
students. Most upper-level clubs and organizations have struggled
to develop or retain membership, whereas Capital Scholars have
brought to life at least twelve vibrant, diverse, and
well-attended clubs, in addition to the existing organizations
that they have taken control of, in the little over two years that
they have been here.
For example, take the
predominantly Capital Scholar Veggie Club, which represents a
minority of a minority. Their membership soared to nearly 20
members last year. Compare this to the Graduate Student
Association. Although the organization represents over 40% of the
campus population, it has only been around since February, and has
fought many of the battles of creating an organization of such a
varied group of individuals.
What has developed is a
network of closely connected Capital Scholars who, generally, vote
as a bloc, as opposed to transfer and graduate students, who don’t
vote at all.
This campus is overflowing
with upper-level students well qualified to bring needed
leadership, guidance, and representation to the Student Government
Association. These students, who come to UIS to pick up an extra
course or two, to return to school, or even to get their doctorate
degree, are depriving the University of the valuable assets that
they could be to the entire campus community.
The administration of UIS
needs to understand fully what an asset the transfer and graduate
students could be the student government and other important
campus bodies. At the end of last year, Dr. Chris Miller, along
with other campus administrators, held a leadership meeting for
Capital Scholars encouraging them to seek out leadership roles on
this campus.
No such meetings were held
for transfer and graduate students. The administration of UIS
should seek to bring out the full potential of all of our
students, not just the honors students.
Being a Capital Scholar
myself, I am a strong advocate for CAP Scholar rights and
representation. No one should be discouraged from running for
office by slotted SGA positions into graduate students, Capital
Scholar students, etc. Everyone should be encouraged by the
administration and fellow students to represent the University,
not factions within it. We at The Journal plead the
upper-level students to take pride in the University, and not just
the classes that they take. What your apathy has done is left
UIS in the hands of freshmen straight out of high school with no
experience at this, or any, college campus.
SGA hammers out
constitution proposal
By Tyson Roan -
Editorial Board Director
At two meetings held during
the past week, the University of Illinois—Springfield Student
Government Association hammered out the finer details of their
third Constitutional proposal in as many years.
Changes from last year’s
Constitution include adding a transfer and graduate student
position, shuffling of duties among the elected officers,
developing a programming director for the Student Activities
Committee, and developing a position for a Director of Public
Relations.
The SGA met as a committee
of the whole on Sunday and again on Wednesday for a total of
nearly seven hours amending Constitutional Committee Chairman
Brace Clement’s proposed Constitutional revisions.
President Stuebe commented
on the time that it took the committee to review the
Constitutional revisions. “The process could have been conducted
a little sooner,” he said. “In the same respect, we had pretty
good decisions. We’ve got a reasonable document that will be good
for the students.”
The new document takes away
two member at large positions and replaces them with one transfer
student seat and one graduate student seat. However, the
committee decided to take out the Constitutional Committee’s
proposal offering an International student representative.
“I think the precedent has
been set that the seats shall be based upon academic programs and
not social sets,” said Stuebe regarding the omission of the
International seat.
The Vice President, who now
has the power to appoint a chair for the Student Activities
Committee, is stripped of that power in the proposed
Constitution. Under the proposed Constitution, applicants
interested in chairing SAC will be selected by the SGA at large.
The Sergeant at Arms, who
is an elected official under the current Constitution, would be
appointed by the President and therefore denied a vote in the SGA
if the proposed revision passes, and to provide for
accountability, the Treasurer will be required to sign-off on all
SGA expenditures.
A minimum GPA needed to run
for office was set at 2.5 for undergraduate students and 3.0 for
graduate students, and a stipulation was put in barring faculty,
civil service, and executive staff who are not at least half-time
students from voting.
Many of Clement’s bolder
suggestions were struck from the Constitution and recommended to
bylaws.
His proposal set forth
Presidential veto power, which was struck down by the committee of
the whole.
Clement also proposed
hiring a paid Programming Director to take charge of SAC. “Of
course, as you all know, we don’t have a lot of programming at
this university,” he said. “This person would be devoted entirely
toward programming.”
According to Clement’s
proposal, the Programming Director would be paid somewhere between
5 and 20 hours per week, responsible for all events sponsored
through student fees and student government.
Representative Brie Hudkins
countered, “I think that you have too many people who want to get
involved on this campus to make it (the Programming Director) into
a paid position.”
In the end, the committee
did little more than establish the already existing position of
SAC chair, leaving the finer details, including whether or not the
position would be paid, up to bylaws which the SGA can change at
their discretion.
The other position that
Clement’s proposal sought to create found a similar end. A paid
Director of Public Relations, which his committee charged with
developing and maintaining the Web site and coordinating
promotions and publicity, was in large part struck down by the
committee of the whole and remanded to bylaws.
Despite the long hours and
heated debate throughout the course of the two evenings, into the
early morning, as the committee of the whole finished the last
article, a sigh of relief and feeling of accomplishment swelled in
the room.
“I think that there was
more honest debate in this than any other time in my experience
with SGA,” said Board of Trustees Representative Andrew
Hollingsead.
President Stuebe summed up
the morale of the group after the marathon was complete. “We did
one helluva job and I’m proud of the SGA.”
Since what is proposed is a
Constitutional revision, students must vote entirely for it or
entirely against it, and are prohibited from voting for some
amendments and against others. Voting for the Constitution, along
with candidates, will be held on the UIS Web site April 27 and 28.
UIS extends same-sex partners benefits to employees
By Matt Cunningham
This summer, University of Illinois Board of
Trustees made a monumental decision to provide a premium
reimbursement program to same-sex employee partners that could
cost up to $400,000 dollars.
“The U of I was at a distinct
disadvantage by not providing this benefit to a small but
important group of valued employees,” said U of I at
Springfield spokesperson Cheryl Peck.
Peck said the policy was necessary in
recruiting high quality faculty and staff so that the university
could compete with other Big Ten schools that offer similar
policies.
Opposition like Rep. Chapin Rose and
the Illinois Center Right Coalition claim the policy decision is
untimely, because the university is in a major financial crisis
and the money used to pay out benefits for same-sex partners
should be spent on providing more classes and paying salaries.
These claims have arisen after an
unprecedented $2 million budget cut this fiscal year including a
25 percent cut to the administrative budget at UIS, said Peck who
still maintains optimism. “Despite [the budget cuts], we have
successfully been able to protect our academic mission and
minimize effect on our students.”
UIS Human Resources
Assistant Vice President Wes Weisenburn said that because the
money used to reimburse premiums will be non-state appropriated,
it could not be budgeted for classes or salaries. Weisenburn said
little else is currently known about the source of the money.
The new policy will reimburse same-sex
partners the initial cost, or premium, of an outside insurance
plan. Interested partners must apply in person and submit proof
that they meet university-determined criteria of domestic
partners. The policy decision approved a recommendation from the
Campus Senate to extend employee benefits to same-sex partners.
The policy will officially take effect
this month, and interested parties are encouraged to apply
immediately. Administration expects to send formal announcement to
the university community in a few weeks. New hires are already
being advised of the program.
Peck said the university considers the
new policy a necessary extension of its Non-Discrimination and
Equal Opportunity Human Rights policy stated commitment toward
“maintaining an educational and work environment of equal
opportunity and non-discrimination on the basis of …sexual
orientation.”
UIS benefits manager Melanie Smith said
the premium reimbursement plan was only fair because “same-sex
partners don’t have the eligibility of marriage to qualify for the
Illinois group insurance program.”
Smith commented that same-sex partners
will never enjoy the benefits given to opposite-sex partners until
state legislation includes them in the group insurance program,
which provides domestic partners comprehensive medical coverage.
The current premium reimbursement plan is the only foreseeable
effort the university will make to extend benefits toward same-sex
partners.
Peck said the University has always
welcomed GLBT community to become faculty, staff, and students.
The UIS office of Multicultural Student Affairs recent inclusion
of Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual, and Transgendered persons and the
recent benefits reimbursement plan make that welcome a reality.
“It sends a good message and a very
positive indication to the GLBT community,” said Peck.
Potential applicants at UIS should
contact the Office of Human Resources. The office reports only one
inquiry into the program, but Weisenbern expects more inquiries
once formal announcement is released.
The Springfield Office of Human
Resources is across from the Health Services building, in HRB 30,
and can be contacted by phone at 206-6652.
|
