Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

GUSA Passes Internal Reforms to Promote More Activism

The Georgetown University Student Association (GUSA) Senate unanimously passed a resolution amending the organization’s bylaws to remove inactive roles.

At the Feb. 20 meeting, senators voted to remove roles including parliamentarian and the sergeant-at-arms, the latter of which keeps order at meetings of the senate. The resolution also amended the bylaws to prevent members of the Constitutional Council, GUSA’s judicial branch, from making public statements on GUSA policies and requiring GUSA justices to remove themselves from cases they may have conflicts of interest in. 

Currently, there are no GUSA members who serve as parliamentarian or sergeant-at-arms. 

Hannah Laibinis/The Hoya | The GUSA Senate passed a resolution that removed inactive roles from the organization through bylaw changes. The resolution also modified the role of the Constitutional Council, GUSA’s judicial branch, to prevent justices from making public comments on GUSA policies.

While bylaw amendments may not significantly impact the student body, the changes will allow GUSA to operate more effectively in order to work for student advocacy, according to GUSA Senator Dominic Gordon (SFS ’24), who co-introduced the bill at the meeting.

“There is too much nonsense in regards to bylaws that gets in our way of doing our actual job,” Gordon said in an interview with The Hoya. “I know it may not be the most pressing thing in the world sometimes, but it does get in the way of our ability to operate.” 

Additionally, Gordon believes that the Constitutional Council should be removed entirely from GUSA as it has not operated effectively for years. 

“I’ve made it pretty clear in the past that I think we should get rid of the Constitutional Council,” Gordon said. “They have not met in several years and I feel like it’s ridiculous to have a whole branch of government that doesn’t really exist. They have pretty unclear ethical guidelines, which has been a problem like in the past.” 

In the past, members of the Constitutional Council have published editorials in campus publications, including The Hoya, which have created barriers to GUSA’s operations, Gordon said. 

To operate effectively, GUSA needs a complete structural overhaul, according to GUSA Senate Vice Speaker Rowlie Flores (COL ’22).

“This recent legislation that we passed removed clauses regarding a parliamentarian and a sergeant-in-arms. These are roles that in my four years of GUSA have not heard of,” Flores wrote to The Hoya. “But these changes do not come close to all the changes we need to make. We need to consider election reform, which I argued in our Ways and Means meeting requires its own legislation due to the controversies surrounding it.”

Last fall, GUSA proposed a restructuring referendum to reform the organization by abolishing the senate and executive. Although 72.12% of voters voted in favor of the referendum, it failed to pass when the election did not meet the 25% minimum voter turnout rate needed for constitutional referendums.  

GUSA Senator Bora Balçay (SFS ’23), who introduced the restructuring referendum last fall, believes students will be more receptive to internal reforms.  

“There is a great deal more work to be done and internal reforms aren’t enough to overhaul the institution but this is a great place to start,” Balçay wrote to The Hoya. 

Although GUSA President-elect Kole Wolfe (SFS ’24) and Vice President-elect Zeke Ume-Ukeje (COL ’24) will take over the GUSA executive soon, the new administration will not impact work being done to reform the organization, according to Balçay.  

“Every new executive presents a certain challenge to the established working relationship. But I am optimistic that the work for restructure will continue unhindered and that we will have a concrete proposal fairly soon,” Balçay wrote.“I think there is a particular appetite for changing the institution now more than ever given the controversy surrounding the last election.” 

At a meeting of the GUSA senate held earlier this month, senators debated for over two hours over whether to certify Wolfe and Ume-Ukeje’s victory after they were accused of exchanging alcohol for votes. Wolfe denied these allegations at the meeting. 

To be successful, future restructuring attempts must listen to the demands of the student body, according to Flores. 

“Surely, amendments to our bylaws can only do so much and we still need to reconsider the merits of an entire restructure project, especially as the distinction between the executive and senate becomes more of a blur,” Flores wrote. “However, this also means that we need to restructure correctly and actively engage with the student body throughout the process.”

View Comments (2)
Donate to The Hoya

Your donation will support the student journalists of Georgetown University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Hoya

Comments (2)

All The Hoya Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  • L

    LarryCMar 17, 2022 at 4:00 pm

    Do away with all democratic processes and parliamentary procedure? What do you do then, just beat up anyone that is making a point you don’t like. Who is running this thing now and why?

    Reply
  • M

    MattFeb 25, 2022 at 11:20 am

    “Last fall, GUSA proposed a restructuring referendum to reform the organization by abolishing the senate and executive. Although 72.12% of voters voted in favor of the referendum, it failed to pass when the election did not meet the 25% minimum voter turnout rate needed for constitutional referendums. ”

    This is precisely why a Constitutional Council is needed (or perhaps better reading comprehension among Senators). The GUSA Constitution threshold for amendments requires a 25% YES vote by the student body (and that yes vote must be in the majority). So if there was, e.g., a 30% turnout and 75% of voters voted yes, the amendment would still not pass because only 22.5% of the student body voted yes. The reason for the high threshold is to make sure potentially major structural reforms get the buy-in of at least a quarter of the student body. Otherwise, major changes could pass with only slightly over 12.5% of the student body voting yes.

    Reply