A minor political standoff may be nearing resolution -- at least for now -- and a permanent solution could be devised later tonight. At issue are the Nominations and Elections Committee's selections to the University Council, the organization which brings together students and administrators, which have continued to be held behind closed doors.
When a handful of groups lodged reasonable complaints last spring about not being granted UC seats, this column advocated for the Undergraduate Assembly to have a real vote on the nominees.
The quick fix discussed on Sunday by the UA grants another seat to the nominations committee in attempt to satisfy the concerned parties. And while it is encouraging to see the body debating this issue, the real problem is not the actual seats themselves, but the process by which they are chosen.
That process is up for discussion at tonight's UA Steering committee meeting, and the time has come for Penn's elected student government to step out from behind the rubber stamp and assert power it should have had in the first place.
Under a more fair system, the NEC would propose individual nominees -- as opposed to a slate of five as it stands now -- for the University Council, to be decided on separately by the UA. This way, the process is transparent, and there are built-in mechanisms for conflict resolution. This is no different than the way the United States Senate hears nominations put forward by the president.
If the NEC's nominees cannot appear before the UA for a a proper review, they have no business representing the voice of the entire student body.
The steering committee should recommend, and the UA should pass a lasting reform to this process, more than just a temporary solution.
