CAMPUS

High Stakes and Low Expectations in Student Government

It’s interesting to hear about student government over at William and Mary, mainly because it’s so different from my school, the University of Oregon.

William and Mary is one of the oldest universities in the country – a small school filled with traditions and famous alumni. The UO has 20,000 students, and it’s greatest claim to history is that Animal House was filmed on campus. (We used to have annual Halloween riots, which was a tradition of sorts, but then the police started using beanbag guns.)

That said, I have to disagree with Joe, who said that the stakes in student governnment are low. They’re not – at least in terms of pure monetary figures. The Associated Students of the University of Oregon manages $11 million in student money. That’s a lot of cash, and the bitter fights over how to spend it often come down to fundamental worldviews. It’s a “war of ideas” as much as a war of competing interests.

Of course, it’s still petty and juvenile. Funny that Matt should say that W&M’s student government is among the least corrupt that he’s witnessed because the UO’s is the most corrupt and rancorous I’ve ever seen. (I’m talking about senators voting to send themselves to conferences with student money and crying during meetings, among other things.)

Finally, I’m not offering an alternative to democratic student government, merely suggestions as to how I think it can function better. I already stated a couple ideas, but to reiterate:

• Take a good, hard look at how mandatory fees affect student government. Some sort of authoritative study, as professor Downs suggests, would be a great start. I’m not going to call for abolishing the fees yet, but we can’t just implicitly accept that the current model is the best.
• Improve outreach. It’s great that, as Matt said, William and Mary has high voter turnout, but that’s not the case at the UO (and presumably many other large, public universities). Involving more students in student government decreases the bad incentives I mentioned earlier.
• Increase coverage in student media. College newspapers should be hounding their student leaders. No one else doing it, which is why they need all the scrutiny they can get. Seriously, heap abuse on them. I totally agree with Joe that media coverage is one of the best ways to affect change.
• Improve institutional memory. I’m intrigued by W&M’s faculty adviser that Matt mentioned. The UO doesn’t really have one, but it would be a great idea.