Apathetic SGA and students fail each other

House Editorial

Since launching its student-based campaign last fall, the Student Government Association has touted the slogan "Your SGA" as a new approach to student government — one dedicated to the organization's increased visibility and accountability to JMU students.

Throughout the school year, the campaign included new methods of involving students and aimed to help students feel connected to their government. From radio shows to informal meetings on the commons, the SGA aimed to increase communication and involvement with senators and students.

This week, both the SGA and the students failed to live up to the motto "Your SGA."

At its regular Tuesday meeting, too few senators were present to meet quorum — two-thirds of the senators. Nothing was discussed and nothing was debated. Out of 84 senators, 49 showed up, according to senior Matthew Benjamin, speaker of the Senate. But, according to the Student Senate house rules, all senators are required to attend all Student Senate meetings. On the agenda were bills concerning the student elections and the Danville Memorial Scholarship. It is a disservice to students — the constituents SGA aims to represent — when the SGA is unable to meet on issues directly affecting the student body.

Students, however, didn't uphold their end of the bargain either.

In an audience of about 100 people, only about 20 were not affiliated with the SGA at Tuesday's candidate forum, according to Benjamin. The few students who attended the forum heard candidates running in today's election speak about their platforms. Some of the candidates' platforms mentioned increasing visibility in the community and increasing communication with the student body.

A candidate forum can be an invaluable resource for students — one that, this time, most JMU students chose not to take advantage of. But, despite low attendance, students shouldn't take all the blame. If the SGA intends to connect with students, it should have done more to advertise the forum. Although Benjamin said fliers and handbills were distributed, why not also send out a campus-wide e-mail or post signs and posters to inform students of SGA events?

True, some students might not be responsive regardless of how widely the event is promoted. But, in dealing with an event as large as a candidate forum that can affect the leadership of the student body for a full year to come, a few more posters couldn't hurt.

Concerning today's elections, Benjamin said he expected a greater turnout than in previous years. About 20 percent of the student body voted last year, up from 12 percent the previous year, according to an April 3, 2003, press release. One of the reasons Benjamin said he thought turnout would increase this year is because of the "Your SGA" campaign. "Students have a better perception of what we do," he said. "We have more quality people running and have increased [student body] awareness due to the campaign."

If awareness really was increased, and the SGA really has given students a better perception of its actions and events, today's election results should reflect the change the campaign hoped to inspire last fall.

The SGA really can't be "Your SGA" when quorum at Student Senate meetings is lost and too few students express interest in the candidates who run for election. Students can't, in good conscience, vote for a student leader in an organization that is unable to hold meetings on the fault of its own members. And the SGA — your SGA — can't be the voice of students in a community too apathetic to even show up.