EDITORIAL: No Politics, Please

UA Chairperson and CollegeUA Chairperson and Collegesenior Lance Rogers playedUA Chairperson and Collegesenior Lance Rogers playedpolitics when he withdrewUA Chairperson and Collegesenior Lance Rogers playedpolitics when he withdrewhis support for a permanentUA Chairperson and Collegesenior Lance Rogers playedpolitics when he withdrewhis support for a permanentUnited Minorities CouncilUA Chairperson and Collegesenior Lance Rogers playedpolitics when he withdrewhis support for a permanentUnited Minorities Councilseat on University Council.UA Chairperson and Collegesenior Lance Rogers playedpolitics when he withdrewhis support for a permanentUnited Minorities Councilseat on University Council.__________________________ But it seems Rogers has changed his tune. Last Wednesday when Council once again considered granting the UMC a permanent seat, Rogers reversed his original view. "I do not believe the UMC should get a seat," he said. "If we give them a seat, we should give every student organization a seat." We wonder why the sudden turn around? Under the former Council constitution, the UMC held a permanent seat. Rogers said he initially chose to support the permanent space, even after a constitutional change, because he did not want the seat removed from the group. He claimed that eliminating the seat would limit UMC representation and muffle minority concerns. In retrospect, a closer investigation shows that Rogers was merely playing politics. As part of a quid pro quo, he committed his support for a permanent UMC place on Council, in exchange for College senior William Walton's support for a permanent seat for the University's Ivy Council representative. But with an Ivy Council seat secure, Rogers reversed his position and abandoned his deal with Walton. He said the seat in question raises new constitutional problems because UMC members have not been elected by the students. In reality, Rogers neglected his end of a political bargain because he already had what he wanted -- a permanent seat for Ivy Council. Rogers is supposed to have student interests in mind as the leader of student government on campus. Instead he has entered into a sly deal and has sold his support to further his own agenda. And, while public figures are entitled to change their opinions, personal objectives must be separated from the issues. To rectify this situation, we hope Rogers will work with Council, the UA and the UMC to ensure that a plurality of voices will be heard on Council. We urge him to modify the current composition of Council to guarantee that more student groups are represented on this important governing body. If he would rather work within the UA, we suggest he actively solicit UMC members to run for the UA, giving them the opportunity to sit on Council with the support of the student electorate.