Student Union

Last night, Student Union Senate held a forum on the tobacco ban and also voted on Student Union’s official response.  An array of viewpoints were expressed at the forum, and students were active participants in the discussion regarding SU’s appropriate reaction.

Senate passed a resolution reacting to the ban by a margin of 15-5 (see below for the resolution itself).  The resolution calls for greater communication between the administration and students, formal administrative recognition of the importance of student input, and administrative reevaluation of the tobacco ban’s implementation. 

Many students would rather Student Union advocate against or for the ban.  It is clear that the student body is deeply conflicted on this issue, with ardent supporters on either side.  As a result, Senate primarily criticized the process by which the decision was reached, with the intention of spurring reevaluation of both the ban itself and communication between the administration and students.  On such major issues, it is critical that the administration seek widespread student input.  I believe that for many students, this has caused a crisis in confidence in both their student governments and their university administration.  These concerns must be addressed.

Many other questions remain to be answered.  What will be done for the many staff members who will be affected, beyond students?  How will this ban be enforced, when the previous restrictions against smoking near building entrances were not?  What will the penalties be?  How does the student body truly feel?  And ultimately, is it possible to retract or reach a compromise on the ban, should the student body wish it so?

For those who are angry about the ban, and wish Student Union had spoken directly against it, this is only the beginning.  More discussion must occur, and we need to better determine how the student body feels as a whole.  At each step in the process, we want to speak on behalf of students—and do so accurately, not through our own preconceptions or anecdotal evidence.  This resolution hopefully ensures a seat in the table for students by calling for the administration to publicly reaffirm their belief that undergraduate student input is essential.  To achieve this, it was critical that Student Union speak out and avoid allowing four months to pass over the summer without a response.  

The most effective way to ensure that Student Union retains this ability to advocate for students is through a cooperative partnership with the administration—not in the sense of rubber-stamping their decisions, but reliable advocacy for the student body.  I stress that the goal of this resolution is to voice our disappointment and confusion to such a major decision being made without widespread input from students, while also calling for changes in the ban's implementation as a result of the many student concerns, as well as a demonstrated commitment from the administration to their willingness to respond to student outcry.   We look forward to a renewed and continued constructive partnership in the years to come.  The only way to improve students’ lives is for students and administrators to work together in a mutually respectful relationship.