OPINION: SGA Must Abolish The Presidential Veto

 

("Court Gavel - Judge's Gavel - Courtroom", by wp paarz via Flickr)

In 2016, student senators amended student government’s constitution to greatly expand the executive branch’s powers. At the time, the senators said that the change was to bring the student forum in line with The United States’ government and other student government models. To do this, they endowed the student body president with the power to veto any senate action he disliked. Likewise, they gave the senate commensurate powers to override the president’s veto provided it has a three-fourth’s majority.

Yet, blindly copying for the sake of copying, reformers kept the SGA president in charge of running the senate’s business meetings. This means the very officer who can kill all of its business decisions also runs its meetings. I mean, talk about an injury to the senate’s independence.

The presidential veto was a mistake. It makes an authoritarian out of the SGA president and places an unnecessary barrier by undermining the senate independence. SGA should abolish the presidential veto and return student government to its previous model.

Democracy's Value Proposition

With a democracy, one of the main benefits is peace and stability. This is because the only decisions that can prevail in a democratic government (supposedly) are those that are agreeable to the majority. This means that whatever decisions come out of the halls of government are most likely to preserve peace, stability and majority rule. What would happen if a minority of the population could get a government to enact decisions that were disagreeable to most people? There would be disquiet and unrest since the majority would be dissatisfied. 

Therefore, in order to attain the benefits of stability through democracy, democratic expression must be robust and unencumbered. In the student context, the student senate must be able to freely express the sentiment of its student constituents without fear of censorship or interference.

However, the president’s presence looms over the senate as long as he has his veto, dissuading efforts or intimidating others out of pursuing certain courses of action because he might disapprove. It would kill action in the senate before it even gets off the ground. SGA must abolish the presidential veto to keep the president from interfering with democratic deliberations in the senate.

Standoffs Unlikely

Now, before we go further, it is important to note that a stand-off between the senate and the president is unlikely to happen. I have found most students are not in SGA because they have firm convictions about school policy, but because they like how SGA looks good on their resume! An independent-minded student senator is rare.

What If They Were? 

However, as a thought experiment, let’s say that it did happen. What would it be like? Let us say that students want to oppose an increase to the parking permit fee from $90 dollars to $110 dollars in the next school year. These claim the increase is too steep and that students are already dissatisfied with available parking spaces as it is. 

However, let us say that the student body president (SGA president) supports the increase, citing that it is necessary to begin saving for a new parking garage and is what is best for the university.

Now, let’s say a resolution opposing the fee hike and calling for the administration to end its plans immediately makes to its way through the senate and passes with 68 percent of vote.

However, the student body president, citing his previous convictions that the parking permit increase is good for future students and for the university, vetoes the resolution, thereby nullifying the senate’s action. It never gets to the administration. So, without 75 percent of the vote in the senate, the senate fails to override the president’s veto. Finally, the administration raises the parking permit to $110 dollars.

Was this a good outcome? According to this scenario, the student body would have been so moved enough to even get 68 percent of the student senate to act. Senators had to write a resolution, support it in the senate and then vote for it, even in the face of opposition. This is a lot of work!

However, after all of this momentum from the student body, one student, the student body president, can shut it all down. This person is not a “president”, or a presiding officer, but a king, an authoritarian, a Caesar. His will should not matter so much. He makes student subjects, instead of stakeholders. So, SGA should abolish the presidential veto.

Too High A Bar 

A downside in this hypothetical scenario is that student sentiment will go increasingly unrecognized when students feel that there is no point in seeking democratic redress of their grievances. After all, if one person can shut it all down, then what is the point? Overcoming a presidential veto is just too high a bar for petitioners to reasonably believe that they can clear.

Risks To Administration

The danger to the administration is that this voice-suppressing activity among the student body makes it more likely, in desperate scenarios, for students to resort to rioting or protest, as Canadian students did in 2012 when they felt they didn’t have a sufficient voice to protest tuition hikes. The presidential veto disadvantages both students and the administration.  

Without Interference

If the student body is going to be so animated about an issue enough to undertake all of that effort to move the senate, then it ought to be able to make its proposals without interference from the SGA president. The university president can handle the complaints he gets from student government.

An SGA presidential veto presents too much obstruction to democratic student representation. SGA should abolish the presidential veto and return the student government to its previous structure.  

Twitter: @Jhescock12

Sign-up for my newsletter!

Feature image: "Court Gavel - Judge's Gavel - Courtroom", by wp paarz via Flickr

*EDITOR'S NOTE: This article was edited with minor changes for flow and presentation on Oct. 19, 2024.