Students to decide on UA reform

With 600 student signatures on a petition and a two-thirds vote from the Undergraduate Assembly, the proposed reform to the UA’s internal executive elections is now officially a referendum.

The referendum will ask students whether the UA chairman and vice chairman for external affairs should be renamed the UA president and vice president and elected directly by the entire student body.

The UA passed the bill by a vote of 25 to one with three abstentions.

Although calling a referendum only requires either a petition of 200 student signatures or a two-thirds vote from the UA, College senior Natalie Vernon, the Student Activities Council chairwoman and one of the students spearheading the reform said she was glad both occurred.

Vernon said the result spoke volumes of the UA and was exactly what she wanted.

“The UA is about entertaining motions like these and getting student involvement,” she said.

She argued that reform would inspire greater student interest in Penn Student Government, as well as be a “fundamental way to change the bedrock of the way Penn operates.”

When the referendum is put to a vote next month, at least 20 percent of the student body will need to vote, and a majority of that number will need to vote in favor of the bill, for the proposed reform to be enacted.

UA Chairman and College junior Alec Webley also supported the bill, saying that the decision about whether to change the current system should be brought “to the arena where it’s always belonged — the student body.”

Despite the bill’s widespread support, some still had doubts.

Wharton freshman and UA member Hunter Horsley raised concerns regarding whether the bill had been discussed enough and whether it would create the best form of democracy for the UA.

College junior, UA member and Daily Pennsylvanian columnist Emerson Brooking proposed an amendment that would require presidential candidates to serve as a UA member or associate member for six months.

The suggestion came in response to some members’ concerns that candidates without UA experience would not understand the group’s internal workings and might not have the proper administrative connections to be UA president.

However, the amendment failed to pass with many members arguing that candidates might have connections through other organizations, and that the student body should be able to determine the necessary qualifications of a candidate.

The bill that contained the call for reform also included changes to the UA’s bylaws. Two sets of changes were drafted: one for if the referendum passes and one for if it does not.

These changes included making UA membership proportional to Penn’s undergraduate population in terms of size and school distribution. The group also proposed allowing the class boards to determine the titles and tasks of board positions and establishing fall elections that would include transfer students.

The UA also considered sending a letter to students outlining possible negative effects of the referendum if it passes. These included possibly making the UA less effective and creating confusion during the elections process — since the election of UA president and vice president would be held simultaneously with those for UA representatives and the class boards.

However, the body voted not to consider the letter this week, so as not to appear as though endorsing one side of the referendum.

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