House Editorial: The defeat of scholastic virtue

SGA’s actions regarding Eickel shows apathy and arrogance and raises questions concerning integrity of organization

Posted on September 13, 2007
Updated Friday, 1:30 p.m.

After a three-hour debate and the illegal use of secret-ballot voting, the Student Government Association did not accept a motion to move toward impeaching the Student Body President Brandon Eickel. It did pass a bill of censure, stating that it did not support in part or whole the actions taken by Eickel during his spring campaign for president.

A poll that was posted on The Breeze’s Web site found that of 168 students polled, 118 wanted action taken against Eickel. But the students’ wishes were disregarded, and after a tedious debate, the situation remains exactly the same as it was two days ago.

The bill essentially does nothing but issue a proverbial slap on the wrist for Eickel, who plagiarized his campaign ideas from Zach Pilchen and Valerie Hopkins of the College of William and Mary.

The SGA should be ashamed for not standing up to its president and recognizing that he committed one of the most egregious errors a representative of the student body can make. It takes no courage to simply tell Mr. Eickel he was wrong to rip his campaign from other students, and it is silly that the SGA thought the bill’s passage would be enough to punish Eickel.

Last week, we called for the SGA to redeem itself and by taking the harshest action possible against Mr. Eickel, as he is exempt from the Honor Council because his plagiarism did not occur within a classroom setting.

But the SGA let us down. By allowing Eickel to remain in office, the SGA is condoning his actions. Words on a piece of paper are not action. The senators who spoke out against Eickel and called for his impeachment are to be commended. It is a shame there are not more of these senators in office. Soon there may be even fewer, as some disgusted by Tuesday night’s meeting have decided to resign from their posts in protest.

The SGA’s decision is appalling and reflects the gap between senators and their constituency. Did anyone even bother to ask students what they felt was the appropriate action to be taken?

And it doesn’t stop there. The SGA also voted by secret ballot to allow Eickel to keep his seat.

We are not the only ones covering this story. Members of the William and Mary media are aware of the illegality that occurred on Tuesday night’s meeting. It is bad enough our president disgraced himself with his actions, but the entire SGA has now spoken for the student body and by extension, it looks as though JMU will stand for a president who was elected on false pretenses.

Where do we turn next? Our SGA has shown itself to have a weak backbone in dealing with its leader. It seems now that the only one who can take the appropriate action is Eickel himself.

The students have a responsibility to hold Eickel accountable and to not let this situation fall out of the spotlight, as the SGA seems to think we will.

If the SGA will not take a stand, Mr. Eickel should recognize that he needs to take matters into his own hands and resign. The longer he remains in office, the poorer JMU looks. Eickel is now the only one who can begin to correct the wrongs that have been committed by himself and the SGA. 

_________

Other pieces you might also be interested in:

9.14.07
The Flat Hat - News, JMU votes no impeachment for plagiarism
The Flat Hat - Opinion, Eickel must resign
9.13.07
The Breeze - News, Motion Denied
The Breeze - News, SGA breaks legal procedure
The Breeze - Multimedia, AUDIO: SGA Censure Debate
The Breeze - Multimedia, SLIDESHOW: SGA Meeting
9.10.07
The Breeze - Opinion, SGA president does disservice to university
9.06.07
The Breeze - News, Campaign initiatives not Eickel's own
The Breeze - Opinion, House Editorial: Eickel's Apology
The Flat Hat - News, JMU's student government president takes platform from Pilchen
8.27.07
The Breeze - Opinion, Letters to the editor