[263] in UA Senate
Re: 41UAS4.1 "Final Authority"
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Richard Dahan)
Fri Nov 6 14:23:09 2009
In-Reply-To: <alpine.DEB.1.10.0911061352380.20997@dr-wily.mit.edu>
Date: Fri, 6 Nov 2009 14:22:58 -0500
From: Richard Dahan <rdahan@MIT.EDU>
To: Quentin Smith <quentin@mit.edu>
Cc: Alex Dehnert <adehnert@mit.edu>, UA Senate <ua-senate@mit.edu>
--0016e6d7eb46824e9e0477b8c57b
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
As a side note, I would greatly appreciate if people could indicate to which
comments they are referring in future e-mails, as I do below. This would
make following the conversation much easier, especially if you are
responding to multiple e-mails.
In response to Ted: First of all, I definitely agree with your amendments.
Also, in response to your comments about "a dragging-out of the issue," I
would have it no other way. But I was just commending Alex for sticking with
this over such a long period of time.
In response to Quentin: I don't think this does in fact remove Senate form
the loop. In fact, I would be great opposed to the bill if did. I think I
wrote something similar to the second paragraph of your e-mail in a previous
e-mail. This bill allows, perhaps even encourages, that possibility.
We could also require it to happen like this (the treasurer bringing
proposed transfers to Senate's attention before they are made, and only a
few times per year), to which I am not at all opposed. In fact, I think such
a system should definitely be enacted for this year. The advantage of
requiring this for all years is that it requires Senate to be involved no
matter what; the disadvantage is that it reduces Senate's freedom.
- Richard
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Quentin Smith <quentin@mit.edu> wrote:
> I very much think the bill, even as amended, is still a terrible idea. I
> think the only reason to remove the Senate from the loop is if something
> needs to happen with more urgency than the Senate can provide. If Senate is
> meeting every week this year, that's a pretty high bar, and I don't see how
> a few hundred dollars here or there would make a difference if transferred a
> few days early.
>
> How often are we expecting these transfers to need to occur, anyway? I
> can't really imagine that happening more than a few times per semester. I
> think Alex should just briefly announce at a Senate meeting the proposed set
> of transfers and get a simple vote of approval. This doesn't need to take
> much time at all, and indeed, if it does, it indicates that something is
> contentious and shouldn't have skipped Senate anyway.
>
> --Quentin
>
>
> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Richard Dahan wrote:
>
> 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
>>
>>
>>
>>
--0016e6d7eb46824e9e0477b8c57b
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-weight: bold;"><div><span cl=
ass=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-weight: normal;">As a side note, I w=
ould greatly appreciate if people could indicate to which comments they are=
referring in future e-mails, as I do below. This would make following the =
conversation much easier, especially if you are responding to multiple e-ma=
ils.</span></div>
<div><br></div>In response to Ted:</span> First of all, I definitely agree =
with your=A0amendments. Also, in response to your comments about "<spa=
n class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse; ">a draggi=
ng-out of the issue," I would have it no other way. But I was just com=
mending Alex for sticking with this over such a long period of time.</span>=
<div>
<span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse;"><br><=
/span></div><div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse:=
collapse;"><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-weight: bold;">I=
n response to Quentin:</span>=A0I don't think this does in fact remove =
Senate form the loop. In fact, I would be great opposed to the bill if did.=
I think I wrote something similar to the second paragraph of your e-mail i=
n a previous e-mail. This bill allows, perhaps even encourages, that possib=
ility.</span></div>
<div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse;">=
<br></span></div><div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-coll=
apse: collapse;">We could also require it to happen like this (the treasure=
r bringing proposed transfers to Senate's attention before they are mad=
e, and only a few times per year), to which I am not at all opposed. In fac=
t, I think such a system should definitely be enacted for this year. The ad=
vantage of requiring this <span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-st=
yle: italic;">for all years</span>=A0is that it requires Senate to be invol=
ved no matter what; the disadvantage is that it reduces Senate's freedo=
m.</span></div>
<div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-collapse: collapse;">=
<br></span></div><div><span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"border-coll=
apse: collapse;">- Richard<br></span><br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Fri,=
Nov 6, 2009 at 1:55 PM, Quentin Smith <span dir=3D"ltr"><<a href=3D"mai=
lto:quentin@mit.edu">quentin@mit.edu</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">I very much think the bill, even as amended=
, is still a terrible idea. I think the only reason to remove the Senate fr=
om the loop is if something needs to happen with more urgency than the Sena=
te can provide. If Senate is meeting every week this year, that's a pre=
tty high bar, and I don't see how a few hundred dollars here or there w=
ould make a difference if transferred a few days early.<br>
<br>
How often are we expecting these transfers to need to occur, anyway? I can&=
#39;t really imagine that happening more than a few times per semester. I t=
hink Alex should just briefly announce at a Senate meeting the proposed set=
of transfers and get a simple vote of approval. This doesn't need to t=
ake much time at all, and indeed, if it does, it indicates that something i=
s contentious and shouldn't have skipped Senate anyway.<br>
<font color=3D"#888888">
<br>
--Quentin</font><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5"><br>
<br>
On Fri, 6 Nov 2009, Richard Dahan wrote:<br>
<br>
<blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1p=
x #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
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<br>
clause, which I will focus on in this e-mail.=A0<br>
This essentially gives the Senate more freedom without taking away power. I=
t addresses all of the concerns I initially had with the bill. In a<br>
year when we have a great treasurer (like now), Senate can choose to delega=
te power; but when we don't, we're not forced to do anything. If we=
're<br>
worried about individual committees not doing their jobs, we can just empla=
ce the appropriate "limitations," probably a combination notifica=
tions<br>
and waiting periods.<br>
<br>
The only situation for which this bill would be unwise is if in a given yea=
r, the Senate is lazy and delegates this responsibility to the<br>
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 i=
n the UA<br>
that this will never happen, and even if it does, the UA will have bigger p=
roblems than this bill.<br>
<br>
Kudos to Alex for overcoming opposition in Senate and persevering over a dr=
agging-out of the issue to produce what I consider a fine piece of<br>
legislation. Great job indeed.<br>
<br>
I hope the senators reading this will take these arguments into account whe=
n deciding whether or not to vote for this on Monday, or how long to<br>
debate before voting. I personally see nothing wrong with this, but I of co=
urse would love to hear your reasoning if you disagree.<br>
<br>
- RIchard<br>
<br>
<br>
On Fri, Nov 6, 2009 at 11:48 AM, Alex Dehnert <<a href=3D"mailto:adehner=
t@mit.edu" target=3D"_blank">adehnert@mit.edu</a>> wrote:<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Did anyone have any thoughts about this bill? Or questions abou=
t why it is good? Or... anything else?<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Should I be assuming from the silence that nobody has issues, a=
nd it'll sail through Senate on Monday (once it (hopefully) gets off<br=
>
=A0 =A0 =A0the table)? I mean, I wouldn't mind that... I'm just a =
little doubtful.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0~~Alex<br>
<br>
<br>
Alex Dehnert wrote:<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Sorry about how late this is getting out... As I mentioned in m=
y FPRC email, I've been distracted by various things (including<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0by the FPRC, at least from cleaning up 4.1...).<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Fundamentally, I believe that Senate should be able to delegate=
authority in general, not just because of the reallocation bill.<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0The reallocation bill is itself a fairly minor thing --- it'=
;d sway a couple thousand dollars (out of about a hundred thousand<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0dollars) to student groups. If the bill doesn't pass, I won=
't actually be very sad (among other reasons, I'm not actually in<b=
r>
=A0 =A0 =A0many student groups that get money from Finboard, so I'm on=
ly barely personally affected by this...).<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Anyway... I've expanded on some of my reasoning in new wher=
eas clauses, at<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0<a href=3D"http://web.mit.edu/ua/officers/treasurer/Public/FY10=
/2009-10-moving-money/constitution.pdf" target=3D"_blank">http://web.mit.ed=
u/ua/officers/treasurer/Public/FY10/2009-10-moving-money/constitution.pdf</=
a>.<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0New clauses:<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\whereas{it may be more productive for Senate to delegate its f=
inancial authority in certain matters}<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\whereas{it is not a productive use of the Senate's time to=
micromanage and debate certain matters}<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\whereas{Senate may have better things to do than carefully exa=
mine small allocations and reallocations}<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\whereas{such better things may include examining reports such =
as the DPC report and<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0the UA ``Response to the Institute-wide Planning Task Force Pre=
liminary Report'',<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0which may impact long-term Institute policy}<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\whereas{such better things may include examining reports such =
as the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Financial Policy Review Committee's report and the Constitu=
tion Committee's report<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0which are likely to impact long-term UA policy}<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\whereas{such better things may also include proactively settin=
g the UA's policy,<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0including setting broad financial policy or advocacy goals}<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0That clause (slightly modified):<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0``The Senate shall have final authority over the allocation<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0=A0or reallocation of the financial resources of<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0this Association and its subsidiary organizations.<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0\textbf{Senate shall have the power to delegate, or revoke<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0the delegation of, its financial authority, but it may,<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0in a timely fashion, overrule any decision of its delegate.<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Senate may emplace such limitations, including notification<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0or waiting requirements, on the exercise of such delegated<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0power as it sees fit.}<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0In addition, it shall require a two- thirds vote of the<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Senate to authorize the release of funds for expenditure<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0from the Undergraduate Dues Reserve and<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0Contingent (invested reserve).''<br>
<br>
=A0 =A0 =A0~~Alex<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>
--0016e6d7eb46824e9e0477b8c57b--
