WPIRG
On February 3rd, WPIRG (http://wpirg.org/) sent an e-mail to all executive candidates asking for their responses to a series of questions. We were all given until the afternoon of the 5th to respond.
Here are the questions, as I received them, and the answers, as I sent them (with one homonym correction).
WPIRG:
Good day executive candidates,
In an effort to help the student body make informed decisions in the upcoming campus elections, we are asking all candidates for FEDS Executive positions (as well as those acclaimed) eight questions
concerning issues pertinent to WPIRG and its volunteers.
We would appreciate a response by the noon on February 5th; we will be sending the responses to our email lists and posting them on our website.
Thanks and best of luck!
[Name omitted]
On behalf of the WPIRG Board of Directors
Jesse:
Hello,
Apparently life has been busy and I am only now able to respond. Although I was intending to be brief in my answers, I think that I will be more concise than what I had originally desired. I know I can come across as a little coarse, even while giving lengthy answers, so please, give some consideration to the possibility that what I say here may have more depth than what it may at first seem.
WPIRG:
1. a) Have you been involved with WPIRG in the past two years? How?
b) What actions would you like to see take place on campus dealing with leadership development, human rights, social justice, and/or environmental issues?
Jesse:
1)a) No, I have had no direct interactions with WPIRG over the last two years.
b) I think that it would be of benefit for everyone on this campus to go through some form of diversity training. This being ambitious, I think the first step would be for FedS to design and run training for its employees and offer it to its constituents. I think all people can benefit from the good will between people of differing perspectives. Environmentalism is something of importance to students on this campus but they are hesitant to commit since it might mean higher costs of things. Research and education on the benefits, particularly those that appeal to the realist intuitions of constituents, will help successful bids on environmental endeavours more plausible.
WPIRG:
2. Many students are interested in volunteering, contributing to the university, and making a difference on campus and in the world, but feel disengaged. How would you address this issue?
Jesse:
2) I would encourage people to watch ‘Yakko’s Universe Song’. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hmlrI74fwa0) “It’s a great big universe, and we’re all really puny, we’re just tiny little specks about the size of Mickey Rooney.” Given the ominous task of ‘changing the world’ I think what is most effective is informing students of the entry points to some endeavour. I think it is important to show areas where students can make a quantifiable difference while still pleasing their schedules. Other incentives also work. I have always heard good things about, for example, the highly positive atmosphere surrounding bike workshops.
WPIRG:
3. What value do you attribute to having non-FEDS services such as Imprint and WPIRG on campus?
Jesse:
3) I think that third-party entities are of utmost importance in democratic environments. They are what ensure accountability. Although FedS is not a massively evil entity that requires tenacious third-parties, it is precisely in those areas that FedS glazes over, likely due to lack of knowledge on a particular matter, where third-party watchdogs are of significant value. First criticism, then correction.
WPIRG:
4. a) As a FEDS executive, how do you view the relationship of FEDS with these services (WPIRG and Imprint)?
b) Would you support, promote and work with these organizations during your term in office? How?
c) Over the last few years, at least two decisions in Council, Policy 24 and the CKMS referendum, were made with no organization consultation. Would you consult WPIRG regarding FEDS matters that directly affect the organization?
Jesse:
4)a) The relationship between FedS and services such as Imprint and WPIRG should be that of respectful colleagues.
b) Although I think it is important for FedS to work with these groups and seek their input as appropriate, I do not feel as though it would be appropriate to strongly support or promote these groups. The reason for this is that autonomy should be respected, lest someone suspect we be in bed together. You know how rumours can be…
c) No, I would not seek direct consultation with WPIRG on such matters. The reason for this is that FedS is accountable to its constituents and must make decisions in the interest of its constituents. Of course, some constituents would be members of WPIRG, and the voices of these people should also be listened to.
WPIRG:
5. a) How do you feel about the way refundable student fees are managed?
b) What changes might you propose to this system during your term in office?
c) Do you support the implementation of Policy 24 (i.e. online strikable fees for non-society and non-endowment organizations)?
d) Would you seek to discontinue the student fees of any of these organizations?
Jesse:
5)a) I have no strong opinion on it. From what I gather, students see the fee as low enough not to worry themselves with.
b) I see no specific need for action, though I can imagine it plausible that Policy 24 become more prominent an issue.
c) Yes, given that it is a policy of the organization I wish to be the leader of.
d) No, since the concern appears not to be large enough to warrant such activity.
WPIRG:
6. Some students have concerns about the FEDS by-laws around petitions and referenda. In particular:
a) the 90-day period between two referenda on the same issue is seen as too short;
b) allowing referenda based on a question of the petitioner’s choice is seen as too open for bias;
c) there is little to guarantee that those signing a petition are being given truthful information; and,
d) only 7% of the student body is required to vote in order for a referendum to pass. How would you deal with these four issues?
Jesse:
6)a) The by-laws had to mention a period of time. The spirit of the law has good intent. No law is perfect.
b) Perhaps this aspect of procedure should be researched more thoroughly.
c) Such is the nature of information.
d) Such is the nature of current voter turn out. Although a 100% informed voter turn out would be appreciated, this is not the case.
WPIRG:
7. a) Do you think that a referendum about an incidental student fee of an organization external to the FEDS should be invokable with a simple majority vote at student council?
b) If not, would you make it a priority to change the by-laws to remove this power while in office?
Jesse:
7)a) Yes. Students’ Council is a valuable decision-making entity in FedS. A simple majority vote within its meetings must be sufficient to take such actions. This having been said, perhaps there are ways in which councilors may be required to be more knowledgeable on the topic they are voting on.
WPIRG:
8. Do you have any other comments?
Jesse:
Should you be confused by anything said here, please do not hesitate to contact me at Jesse.van.Amerom.for.FedS.President@gmail.com.
[Ha at WordPress making that into an emoticon.]