2008 Woodie Awards
Our View
Issue date: 8/17/08 Section: Opinions
Call us crazy, but we think students deserve a voice in our education. We're the ones whose daily lives are affected by the decisions made by the University's governing body, the ones who enjoy the benefits or suffer the consequences of University policies. Heck, we're the ones paying for the University to function.
As a result, we get a little cranky when politicians make decisions that silence students' voices. This is what happened when Gov. Matt Blunt vetoed Missouri Senate Bill 873, which would create a voting position for the student representative on the University of Missouri-Columbia's Board of Curators. (See story, page 2)
In a statement, Blunt claimed that allowing the Board of Curators' student member to have voting rights would create a problem because it would create "stakeholder representatives," whereas according to Blunt, currently "the nine curators represent the university as a whole rather than a specific university interest, cause or stakeholder group." Aside from the fact that Blunt's description of a completely unbiased, interest-free governing board is unlikely to be accurate, shouldn't the students be the one group that does receive representation? Students pay tuition that plays a large part (enough to give them a controlling share, to continue with Blunt's business metaphor) in keeping a university up and running.
What makes Blunt's veto so surprising is the overwhelming support the bill received in the Missouri legislature: It passed 31-2 in the Senate and 100-47 in the House. Given these margins, the bill easily could win the two-thirds majority in each house needed to override the veto, and we encourage Missouri legislators to do so. The "veto that launched 1,000 Facebook protests" has implications not only for Mizzou but also for Truman.
Truman's Board of Governors is similar to the Board of Curators because both governing bodies have members who are appointed and qualified under Missouri statute - hence the need for a bill in the first place. Both boards make the major decisions that affect their respective universities and contain a non-voting student representative. There is, however, a slight difference between the ages of the student representative - most students serving on the Board of Curators attend Mizzou's professional or graduate school, whereas student representatives on Truman's Board of Governors typically begin serving during their junior year as undergraduates. However, given that Truman students continually have proven themselves to be intelligent, conscientious, dedicated and hard-working, we have no doubt about their ability to take on the duties of a voting board member.
As a result, we get a little cranky when politicians make decisions that silence students' voices. This is what happened when Gov. Matt Blunt vetoed Missouri Senate Bill 873, which would create a voting position for the student representative on the University of Missouri-Columbia's Board of Curators. (See story, page 2)
In a statement, Blunt claimed that allowing the Board of Curators' student member to have voting rights would create a problem because it would create "stakeholder representatives," whereas according to Blunt, currently "the nine curators represent the university as a whole rather than a specific university interest, cause or stakeholder group." Aside from the fact that Blunt's description of a completely unbiased, interest-free governing board is unlikely to be accurate, shouldn't the students be the one group that does receive representation? Students pay tuition that plays a large part (enough to give them a controlling share, to continue with Blunt's business metaphor) in keeping a university up and running.
What makes Blunt's veto so surprising is the overwhelming support the bill received in the Missouri legislature: It passed 31-2 in the Senate and 100-47 in the House. Given these margins, the bill easily could win the two-thirds majority in each house needed to override the veto, and we encourage Missouri legislators to do so. The "veto that launched 1,000 Facebook protests" has implications not only for Mizzou but also for Truman.
Truman's Board of Governors is similar to the Board of Curators because both governing bodies have members who are appointed and qualified under Missouri statute - hence the need for a bill in the first place. Both boards make the major decisions that affect their respective universities and contain a non-voting student representative. There is, however, a slight difference between the ages of the student representative - most students serving on the Board of Curators attend Mizzou's professional or graduate school, whereas student representatives on Truman's Board of Governors typically begin serving during their junior year as undergraduates. However, given that Truman students continually have proven themselves to be intelligent, conscientious, dedicated and hard-working, we have no doubt about their ability to take on the duties of a voting board member.
Be the first to comment on this story