Student leaders to alter UA

The movement to reform the University's student government took great strides forward during winter break, as several key players in the reform process released drafts of proposed constitutions this week. Undergraduate Assembly Chairperson and Wharton junior Dan Debicella said he welcomes the three proposals developed over break and hopes more will be released. The proposals reflect a wide range of ideas and opinions about the future of student government at the University. UA representative and College senior Dan Schorr proposed a plan which would combine most of the current functions of the Student Activities Council, the Nominations and Elections Committee, and the UA into one body. Schorr's draft would eliminate the NEC and transfer the budgetary aspects of SAC to UA committees. The most important aspect of his plan is that the functions of government would all be carried out by elected officials, Schorr said. "The basic principle is combining nominating, finance and lobbying power in one student government," he said. According to Schorr, this would simplify student government's functions and allow more students to become involved. "It is important that students understand how the government works," he said. "Right now, it's not possible to give a simple explanation of the student government structure. And students can't be a part of student government that isn't understandable." Schorr said his proposal would put the most important facets of government into the hands of elected officials, making student government at the University more representative of the student body. And with an increase in the UA's power, more qualified student leaders would run for office, Schorr added. But Debicella, who issued seven proposals of his own, said the key to a better student government lies in electoral reform, not power. "[Schorr's proposal is] lacking the one reform that is fundamentally needed--changing the way the UA is elected," Debicella said. "I will not support any reform." All of Debicella's proposals center around a new election system, involving 33 geographical districts -- in which each district would have its own UA representative. Debicella said this would provide for more accountability among UA members, therefore making the body more effective. "That is the way that a person can say, 'That is my UA representative,'" he said. "If that UA representative is crappy, they'll kick him out. If he's good, they'll keep him." Debicella said his proposals would also give the UA more authority over the other branches of student government. According to Debicella's plans, the UA would have the ability to overrule all decisions made by SAC and NEC. In Schorr's proposal, the UA would do the work currently done by those groups, Debicella said. SAC Finance committee member and College junior Mike Nadel also issued a proposed constitution this week. Nadel said his draft has much in common with Schorr's. But while Schorr's proposal would enhance the UA's power, Nadel said his plan would dissolve all branches of student government and create a new body -- the "Undergraduate Senate" -- which would perform all government functions. Nadel said he and Schorr worked together on their proposals until the time they were released. Before the April referendum on constitutional reform, the two plans will probably be combined. "We're going to compromise and reconcile and put forward one united front," he said. "We didn't plan a strategy for reconciling before going public." Schorr said he and Nadel are still discussing their proposals -- although he criticized Nadel's outright elimination of SAC. "It's very important that student activities at Penn have a forum to communicate," he said. "There has to be a slight check on UA funding so the UA can't indiscriminately wipe out student activity groups." Schorr said he also believes a separate body was needed to recognize and oversee student groups so the UA could focus on student advocacy. Debicella said that although he shares Schorr's concern, in Schorr's plan there is also a danger that the UA could be overwhelmed by non-advocacy responsibilities. "My biggest fear is that general student advocacy would be lost," he said. Debicella, Nadel and Schorr all said they would welcome comments and opinions from members of the University community in the next few months.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.