It turns out this argument doesn’t bode well for Perimeter either. Yes, Perimeter’s representation within the Senate slides up from 33% to 39%, but that’s still a stark minority compared to Downtown’s.
In this proposed model, the only solution to boosting Perimeter’s representation would be to create more Perimeter campuses, or create more colleges on the existing Perimeter campuses. Neither of those seem very feasible, do they?
And in the current model, of which I am a fan, the only solution to boosting Perimeter’s representation is one that simply can’t be manipulated: their enrollment must increase.
It thus is only fair — to use the verbiage of the Perimeter representatives — that the Downtown campus maintain a significant majority as it stands.
ALL FOR NAUGHT
The most disappointingly amusing fact amid these discussions is that Perimeter representatives fail to adequately represent their constituents already, which makes their argument for more power and leverage laughable.
They hope for more voting power in the University-wide Senate, yet they introduce no meaningful legislation to the Senate. Of the 10 articles of legislation introduced to the University-wide Senate this session, five of them were rudimentary seating bills.
And of the articles introduced by Perimeter representatives, none of them discussed or called for change for their constituents.
If Perimeter representatives were more productive members of the Senate, their argument for a “true” Senate model would be more palatable. Yet as it stands, there is no reason to support this legislation aside from the desire to make Perimeter representatives feel better about themselves.
Sen. Abella’s special order was ultimately routed to the Bylaws Committee for review in a 25-3 vote. I can only hope that the members of that committee recognize the baseless argument for more voting power that, even if it were supported by the University-wide Senate, would ultimately be voted down by the students on the spring ballot.
Editor’s Note: This article was updated on Nov. 15 at 1:03 a.m. to provide more context on the legislation introduced.