MSA is losing credibility

The University’s undergraduate student government body has a hasty voting style.

When a student group dubs itself the voice of University of Minnesota students in conversation with the school and government, it’s important that the voice is credible. Through the lack of research and passivity regarding issues brought up in the Minnesota Student Association’s forum, MSA is losing its credibility as a reliable and trustworthy student voice.

At every forum I have attended, one thing has remained consistent: the passivity of voting members. This has held true on landmark resolutions regarding the University’s stance on eliminating the use of fossil fuels on campus and, most recently, increasing the hours of operation for the new Green Line that will run through campus. While I am not arguing the validity of these resolutions, it is extremely important for members of student government to be aware of any negative implications that endorsing these stances might have for students at the University.

When looking at local, state and national governments and the research they do before voting on a bill, it can take anywhere from a few days to a few years for a bill to go from discussion to vote. This lengthy process is to ensure that the bill has been thoroughly vetted and to ensure that any relevant research or repercussions are available to the representatives voting on the bill.

This does not happen in MSA.

MSA has continued to rush through the passing of resolutions that have not been thoroughly vetted by members or even those involved in the presentation of the resolution. When the members of MSA do not do the research or discussion before voting on resolutions, the credibility and impact of those resolutions diminishes.

I strongly encourage the members of MSA to consider dropping their hasty voting styles in favor of education and critical thinking.