[259] in UA Senate
Re: 41UAS4.1 "Final Authority"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Dahan)
Fri Nov 6 13:08:51 2009
In-Reply-To: <4AF45349.40202@mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 13:08:15 -0500
From: Richard Dahan <rdahan@MIT.EDU>
To: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>
Cc: UA Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>
--0016e6d7eb4658bfee0477b7bab5
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
I personally hope that it does sail through Senate on Monday. I'm not 100%
sure I like the whereas clauses, but I do indeed support the That clause,
which I will focus on in this e-mail.
This essentially gives the Senate more freedom without taking away power. It
addresses all of the concerns I initially had with the bill. In a year when
we have a great treasurer (like now), Senate can choose to delegate power;
but when we don't, we're not forced to do anything. If we're worried about
individual committees not doing their jobs, we can just emplace the
appropriate "limitations," probably a combination notifications and waiting
periods.
The only situation for which this bill would be unwise is if in a given
year, the Senate is lazy and delegates this responsibility to the treasurer
and doesn't follow up, and the treasurer isn't on top of things, and the
committees don't do their jobs. I chose to have faith in the UA that this
will never happen, and even if it does, the UA will have bigger problems
than this bill.
Kudos to Alex for overcoming opposition in Senate and persevering over a
dragging-out of the issue to produce what I consider a fine piece of
legislation. Great job indeed.
I hope the senators reading this will take these arguments into account when
deciding whether or not to vote for this on Monday, or how long to debate
before voting. I personally see nothing wrong with this, but I of course
would love to hear your reasoning if you disagree.
- RIchard
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu> wrote:
> Did anyone have any thoughts about this bill? Or questions about why it is
> good? Or... anything else?
>
> Should I be assuming from the silence that nobody has issues, and it'll
> sail through Senate on Monday (once it (hopefully) gets off the table)? I
> mean, I wouldn't mind that... I'm just a little doubtful.
>
> ~~Alex
>
>
> Alex Dehnert wrote:
>
>> Sorry about how late this is getting out... As I mentioned in my FPRC
>> email, I've been distracted by various things (including by the FPRC, at
>> least from cleaning up 4.1...).
>>
>> Fundamentally, I believe that Senate should be able to delegate authority
>> in general, not just because of the reallocation bill. The reallocation bill
>> is itself a fairly minor thing --- it'd sway a couple thousand dollars (out
>> of about a hundred thousand dollars) to student groups. If the bill doesn't
>> pass, I won't actually be very sad (among other reasons, I'm not actually in
>> many student groups that get money from Finboard, so I'm only barely
>> personally affected by this...).
>>
>> Anyway... I've expanded on some of my reasoning in new whereas clauses, at
>>
>> http://web.mit.edu/ua/officers/treasurer/Public/FY10/2009-10-moving-money/constitution.pdf.
>>
>>
>> New clauses:
>> \whereas{it may be more productive for Senate to delegate its financial
>> authority in certain matters}
>> \whereas{it is not a productive use of the Senate's time to micromanage
>> and debate certain matters}
>> \whereas{Senate may have better things to do than carefully examine small
>> allocations and reallocations}
>> \whereas{such better things may include examining reports such as the DPC
>> report and
>> the UA ``Response to the Institute-wide Planning Task Force Preliminary
>> Report'',
>> which may impact long-term Institute policy}
>> \whereas{such better things may include examining reports such as the
>> Financial Policy Review Committee's report and the Constitution
>> Committee's report
>> which are likely to impact long-term UA policy}
>> \whereas{such better things may also include proactively setting the UA's
>> policy,
>> including setting broad financial policy or advocacy goals}
>>
>> That clause (slightly modified):
>> ``The Senate shall have final authority over the allocation
>> or reallocation of the financial resources of
>> this Association and its subsidiary organizations.
>> \textbf{Senate shall have the power to delegate, or revoke
>> the delegation of, its financial authority, but it may,
>> in a timely fashion, overrule any decision of its delegate.
>> Senate may emplace such limitations, including notification
>> or waiting requirements, on the exercise of such delegated
>> power as it sees fit.}
>> In addition, it shall require a two- thirds vote of the
>> Senate to authorize the release of funds for expenditure
>> from the Undergraduate Dues Reserve and
>> Contingent (invested reserve).''
>>
>> ~~Alex
>>
>
--0016e6d7eb4658bfee0477b7bab5
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I personally hope that it does sail through Senate on Monday. I'm not 1=
00% sure I like the whereas clauses, but I do indeed support the That claus=
e, which I will focus on in this e-mail.=A0<div><br></div><div>This essenti=
ally gives the Senate more freedom without taking away power. It addresses =
all of the concerns I initially had with the bill. In a year when we have a=
great treasurer (like now), Senate can choose to delegate power; but when =
we don't, we're not forced to do anything. If we're worried abo=
ut individual committees not doing their jobs, we can just emplace the appr=
opriate "limitations," probably a combination notifications and w=
aiting periods.</div>
<div><br></div><div>The only situation for which this bill would be unwise =
is if in a given year, the Senate is lazy and delegates this responsibility=
to the treasurer and doesn't follow up, <span class=3D"Apple-style-spa=
n" style=3D"font-style: italic;">and</span> the treasurer isn't on top =
of things, <span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-style: italic;">a=
nd</span> the committees don't do their jobs. I chose to have faith in =
the UA that this will never happen, and even if it does, the UA will have b=
igger problems than this bill.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Kudos to Alex for overcoming opposition in Senate and p=
ersevering over a dragging-out of the issue to produce what I consider a fi=
ne piece of legislation. Great job indeed.</div><div><br></div><div>I hope =
the senators reading this will take these arguments into account when decid=
ing whether or not to vote for this on Monday, or how long to debate before=
voting. I personally see nothing wrong with this, but I of course would lo=
ve to hear your reasoning if you disagree.</div>
<div><br></div><div>- RIchard</div><div><br><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">=
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Alex Dehnert <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=
=3D"mailto:adehnert@mit.edu">adehnert@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br><blo=
ckquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #c=
cc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
Did anyone have any thoughts about this bill? Or questions about why it is =
good? Or... anything else?<br>
<br>
Should I be assuming from the silence that nobody has issues, and it'll=
sail through Senate on Monday (once it (hopefully) gets off the table)? I =
mean, I wouldn't mind that... I'm just a little doubtful.<br><font =
color=3D"#888888">
<br>
~~Alex</font><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
<br>
Alex Dehnert wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
Sorry about how late this is getting out... As I mentioned in my FPRC email=
, I've been distracted by various things (including by the FPRC, at lea=
st from cleaning up 4.1...).<br>
<br>
Fundamentally, I believe that Senate should be able to delegate authority i=
n general, not just because of the reallocation bill. The reallocation bill=
is itself a fairly minor thing --- it'd sway a couple thousand dollars=
(out of about a hundred thousand dollars) to student groups. If the bill d=
oesn't pass, I won't actually be very sad (among other reasons, I&#=
39;m not actually in many student groups that get money from Finboard, so I=
'm only barely personally affected by this...).<br>
<br>
Anyway... I've expanded on some of my reasoning in new whereas clauses,=
at <a href=3D"http://web.mit.edu/ua/officers/treasurer/Public/FY10/2009-10=
-moving-money/constitution.pdf" target=3D"_blank">http://web.mit.edu/ua/off=
icers/treasurer/Public/FY10/2009-10-moving-money/constitution.pdf</a>. <br>
<br>
New clauses:<br>
\whereas{it may be more productive for Senate to delegate its financial aut=
hority in certain matters}<br>
\whereas{it is not a productive use of the Senate's time to micromanage=
and debate certain matters}<br>
\whereas{Senate may have better things to do than carefully examine small a=
llocations and reallocations}<br>
\whereas{such better things may include examining reports such as the DPC r=
eport and<br>
the UA ``Response to the Institute-wide Planning Task Force Preliminary Rep=
ort'',<br>
which may impact long-term Institute policy}<br>
\whereas{such better things may include examining reports such as the<br>
Financial Policy Review Committee's report and the Constitution Committ=
ee's report<br>
which are likely to impact long-term UA policy}<br>
\whereas{such better things may also include proactively setting the UA'=
;s policy,<br>
including setting broad financial policy or advocacy goals}<br>
<br>
That clause (slightly modified):<br>
``The Senate shall have final authority over the allocation<br>
=A0or reallocation of the financial resources of<br>
this Association and its subsidiary organizations.<br>
\textbf{Senate shall have the power to delegate, or revoke<br>
the delegation of, its financial authority, but it may,<br>
in a timely fashion, overrule any decision of its delegate.<br>
Senate may emplace such limitations, including notification<br>
or waiting requirements, on the exercise of such delegated<br>
power as it sees fit.}<br>
In addition, it shall require a two- thirds vote of the<br>
Senate to authorize the release of funds for expenditure<br>
from the Undergraduate Dues Reserve and<br>
Contingent (invested reserve).''<br>
<br>
~~Alex<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--0016e6d7eb4658bfee0477b7bab5--
