The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 87, No. 3, Ed. 1 Friday, September 17, 1999 Page: 2 of 24
twenty four pages : ill. ; page 19 x 15 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
THE RICE THRESHER OPINION FRIDAY, SEPTEMBER 17,1999
the Rice Thresher
Jett McAlister,
Mariel Tarn
Editors in Chief
Brian Stoler
Senior Editor
James Dallal,
Gordon Wittick
Opinion Editors
Referendum unwise
and unconstitutional
The referendum proposed at Monday's Student Associa-
tion meeting should not be adopted. Furthermore, the senate
should not allow the referendum ever to appear on a ballot.
The referendum that is proposed, besides being a blatant
violation of the SA Constitution, is a measure that would limit
student choice and confuse already complicated procedural
matters.
A brief explanation of the proposal: The referendum deals
with the reappropriation of more than $32,000 left over from
two defunct blanket taxes. The referendum calls for students
to vote by preferential ballot on various proposals for the
surplus funds. To place an item on the ballot, students would
not be required to submit a petition signed by at least 5
percent of the student population, as they are if they wish to
start an initiative. However, to be placed on the preferential
ballot, a student's proposal would have to win approval by two-
thirds of the SA Senate.
The senate will decide in the coming weeks whether or not
to hold the referendum; if the proposal for the referendum
passes, the referendum will be held in October. If the referen-
dum passes, a special election by preferential ballot would be
held at a later date.
It is ironic that we would advocate not letting students vote
on a measure in the name of protecting their right to choose.
Consider the referendum: If two-thirds of the students vote
"yes" on it in October, then proposals would have to get a two-
thirds majority in the senate to make it onto the preferential
ballot in the next election. The constitution states that "the
members of the Student Association may demand an initia-
tive on any action upon written petition of 5 percent of the
members of the Student Association." Therefore, anyone
could ordinarily get a proposal on the ballot; this referendum,
however, introduces a level of scrutiny over student initia-
tives not present in the SA Constitution.
This alone does not make the referendum unconstitu-
tional. It merely creates the possibility of immense confusion.
If the referendum is passed, we could see several proposals
get the support of the senate they need and be placed on the
preferential ballot, while other proposals, for whatever rea-
son, may not get the two-thirds vote needed. However, if
these proposals are backed by petitions with the appropriate
number of signatures, the senate is bound by its own consti-
tution to hold a student body-wide vote on the initiatives.
Unfortunately, the constitution is vague in this stipulation
and does not specify by when the senate must conduct such
elections. It is therefore conceivable that the senate could
hold some proposals from the preferential ballot, not allow
any votes regarding those proposals to appear in the same
election, and by doing so prevent students from choosing
which proposal they want to adopt.
We said above that the referendum is unconstitutional.
The constitution states that "any monies that may have
accrued ... may be reapportioned through an initiative or
referendum of the members of the Student Assocation." This
measure is followed by a provision that the monies be reap-
propriated according to a formula if "accrued monies are not
reapportioned by the end of the next academic year through
an initiative or referendum."
The only possibilities, therefore, for reappropriation of the
funds are the formula, referenda and initiatives. This referen-
dum, by providing for a preferential ballot election in which a
two-thirds majority of students is not required to approve the
disbursement of the funds, directly violates this section of the
constitution. A preferential ballot election is not a referendum
or initiative; if, after a full academic year, the funds are not
distributed through an initiative or referendum, they must be
distributed by formula. Herein lies the conflict.
The SA Senate should kill the referendum at its next
meeting because of its unconstitutionality.^- it is not killed,
we should all keep in mind that if the referendum passes, we
will actually be voting on lessthan we would be otherwise, thus
giving the senate more power than the constitution intends it
to have in the procedure of reappropriating this money.
&
p.
X STILL S3Y
Wiess
0
siz.e Doesn'T MaTTeR
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Health insurance
article inaccurate
To the editor:
I was pleased to see the Sept. 3
article "Rice Health Insurance" in
the Thresher. However, there were
some important inaccuracies that I
would like to clear up.
Contraception, includingthe Pill,
is covered by both Plans A and B of
the overall Rice Student Health In-
surance Plan. The diaphragm and
contraceptive jellies, foams and
creams are the only forms of birth
control that are not covered.
Outpatient care for mental health
services is covered under Plan A. If
students need help finding these
services outside the university, they
are welcome to consult with any of
the counselors at the Rice Counsel-
ing Center. Students may see an off-
campus doctor for services that are
also covered by Health Services. The
article indicated that this coverage
was not permitted and stated, "Never
do anything without checking with
Health Services." It is not necessary
to check with Dr. Mark Jenkins or
Dr. Stacy Ware at Health Services
before seeing an outside health pro-
vider unless students want their help
in locating appropriate referrals.
Lindley Doran
Assistant Dean
Student Health Programs
Director
Rice Counseling Center
HUMA101 columnist
assumes wrongly
To the editor:
This letter is in response to the
column entitled "How to change your
HUMA 101 section" in the Sept. 3
edition of the Thresher. The author
of this column made several unfair
generalizations about both Dr.
Lockey and humanities courses. I
will begin by stating that I took Hu-
manities 101 and 102 last year, and
my professor for the spring semes-
ter course was Dr. Paul Lockey.
The article states that Lockey is
an easy professor. Those students
who have been fortunate enough to
take one of Lockey's sections know
that nothing could be^ further froob
the truth.
Lockey is an excellent professor,
probably the best that I have had at
Rice thus far; moreover, Lockey does
not give away grades. Every student
in his section works for the grade
that he or she receives. While most
HUMA professors require approxi-
mately three five-page papers dur-
ing the semester, We were required
to write between 40 and 50 pages.
We were allowed to do rewrites, so
many students in the class wrote 80-
plus pages.
Lockey not only helps students
to learn to write more clearly, but he
helps students learn to express their
ideas verbally in class and to think
more logically and in an organized
manner. If this does not constitute
hard work, especially compared to
other HUMA sections, then I do not
know what does. Lockey's students
earn their grades; they are not given
to them.
Likewise, Lockey does not earn
his outstanding course evaluations
by handing out high grades. His
students praise him strictly because
he is a wonderful professor. By the
middle of the semester, I knew that
I would give Dr. Lockey an excellent
evaluation, and I had no idea what
my grade would be at that point. He
encouraged the class to think freely
and did not force his ideas on us.
One can learn a great deal in HUMA
if she or makes the effort. I would
encourage anyone who will take
HUMA and is willing to work hard
to enroll in one of Lockey's sections.
I suggest that the Thresher staff
should do a little more research be-
fore they print untrue generaliza-
tions about professors and courses.
This is damaging to the professors'
reputations, and it gives new stu-
dents the idea that they will not learn
anything in a course. The best ad-
vice I can give to the Thresher staff
was printed in the aforementioned
column: "Word of mouth is often
correct." Just ask anyone who has
taken a course from Lockey.
Chris Powers
Baker College sophomore
Editor's note: All signed columns
represent solely the opinion of the
author and not the opinion of the
Thresher staff.
Owlnet too slow for
off-campus students
To the editor:
I am frustrated. As any friend of
mine can say, I'm very proud of my
fast coi'nputer. Right now, however,
as I write this letter, it is clunking
away at an obnoxiously slow pace.
How could this be? Because I live
off campus, and Rice's off-campus
network dial-up is unacceptably out
of date.
The maximum connection speed
is 33.3 kbps. Personally, I have used
the service for the last four months
and I have never reached speeds
above 28.8 kbps. Right now, I am
connected at 21.6 kbps — a speed
that is basically unacceptable for
normal Web browsing, to say noth-
ing of downloading large files or
uploading anything to my Owlnet
account.
I'd like to congratulate Rice In-
formation Technology for increas-
ing our account size by 20 mega-
bytes of space. The new Rice Web
page is also a step towards bringing
us up-to-date with the rest of the
world. We're still way behind,
though.
How about it, Rice IT? Offer a 56-
kbps dial-up connection that's reli-
able and consistent, like any basic
Internet service does. Engineer ba-
sic procedures to keep our technol-
ogy services cutting-edge in future
years. It's in the university's best
interest to do so.
Aaron Martz
. Brown. College sophomore
CONTACTING THE
THRESHER
Letters
m Letters to the editor
should be sent to the Thresher
by mail, fax, e-mail to
thresher@rice.edu or be deliv-
ered in person. We prefer that
letters be submitted on disk
or by e-mail. Letters must be
received by 5 p.m. on the Mon-
day prior to a Friday publica-
tion date.
■ All letters must be signed
and include a phone number.
Rice students and alumni must
include their college and year.
We will withhold names upon
request.
■ Letters should be no
longer than 500 words in'
length. The Thresher reserves
the right to edit letters for
both content and length.
News Tips
m Tips for possible news sto-
ries should be phoned in to
the Thresher at (713) 527-4801.
Subscribing
■ Annual subscriptions are
available for $40 domestic and
$90 international via first class
mail.
Advertising
m We accept both display
and classified advertisements.
Contact the Thresher for more
information.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
McAlister, Jett & Tam, Mariel. The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 87, No. 3, Ed. 1 Friday, September 17, 1999, newspaper, September 17, 1999; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth246654/m1/2/: accessed July 18, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu.; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.