As a senator emeritus of the Ohio University Student Senate, I urge State and Foreign Affairs Commissioner Taylor Abbott, or any other voting member of the senate, to introduce a resolution to the senate floor concerning Ohio Issue 2.
Because of the direct implications that Issue 2’s passage or failure will have on OU, and based on the senate’s history of entertaining debate on statewide ballot issues, I strongly believe this is a conversation elected student leaders must have on behalf of the students who have elected them to office.
The notion that OU students will not be affected by the outcome of Issue 2 undermines the work of Ohio’s elected officials, who are seeking out measures to balance a statewide budget that includes OU, and the work of state-employee unions — including the American Federation of State, County and Municipal Employees, which is committed to enhancing the lives of OU students on a daily basis.
I am afraid some members of senate have drastically underestimated the impact that this issue will have on the OU community.
Whether you are in favor of Senate Bill 5 because of its cost-cutting measures or are opposed because of its limitations on state employees, the result of Nov. 8’s vote will affect the student experience. It is the duty of Student Senate, as the formal representation of the student body, to take up this debate and add the OU student voice to the fray.
In addition, there is ample precedent from previous student senates where voting members have taken a stand on statewide ballot issues.
In 2006, senators fiercely debated and later passed Resolution 0607-15 opposing Issue 3, a constitutional amendment that would have permitted slot machines and additional horse-racing simulcast stations in Ohio despite the promise for increased funds for the Ohio Board of Regents.
In addition, in 2004, Senate passed Resolution 0405-13, which opposed a Constitutional amendment that banned gay marriage in Ohio. As an openly gay freshman who had just arrived in Athens, the fact that my student leaders took such a frank stance on an issue I felt very passionate about created an instant respect and admiration for the body and, in my view, gave the senate legitimacy.
I understand there might be a discrepancy or misunderstanding about what President Kyle Triplett’s role in this resolution may be. With that said, I want to make it clear that it is absolutely not President Triplett’s job or responsibility to determine what is worthy of discussion and what is not.
The beauty of Roberts Rules, which the senate’s own governing rules echo, is that the body decides what is and is not appropriate for discussion. President Triplett was not the only one elected to represent OU students, and although there are times when the president needs to speak for senate as a whole, this is not one of them.
Finally, I would like to remind the members of Student Senate of the responsibility that comes with being elected or appointed to this influential body. If some student senators fear repercussions, perhaps they should seriously consider choosing another extracurricular in which to participate.
For those senators who feel a recorded vote on the issue might hurt their career prospects, they can always vote “Present.” And if President Triplett is opposed to the resolution being discussed or the resolution itself, he can always “pass the gavel” to express his opinion on the relevance of such a resolution and the role of the senate on statewide ballot measures.
As with any major issue affecting OU, silence from Student Senate cannot and should not be tolerated.
Will Wemer is a 2008 OU graduate and served as Student Senate treasurer in 2007-08 academic year.
