Since GUSA President Joe Luther (COL ’16) and Vice President Connor Rohan (COL ’16) were inaugurated, they have demonstrated that they are committed to making the Georgetown University Student Association more representative of the student body.

They accepted applications for the cabinet and appointed 67 students, 46 percent of whom were newcomers to GUSA, and created a handful of new positions and specializations.

In a bid to foster inclusiveness, Luther and Rohan have attempted to make GUSA more representative of the student body — by including a significant number of student body members in their administration.

With 67 members, the Luther-Rohan executive dwarfs that of previous President and Vice President Trevor Tezel (SFS ’15) and Omika Jikaria (SFS ’15), which consisted of fewer than 40 staff and cabinet members.

However, there is a threshold that, if crossed, would prevent the Luther-Rohan administration from achieving progress.

Potentially, the most troublesome change seems to be the increased cabinet size. On sheer logistics alone, mobilizing 67 cabinet members and ensuring that each is briefed on executive updates promises to be a daunting task.

While Luther and Chief of Staff Abbey McNaughton (COL ’16) are optimistic about the effects these changes will have on GUSA’s functionality and its relationship with Georgetown’s student body, this diffusion of responsibility will hinder efforts to enact change on campus.

A new, radically different cabinet isn’t particularly surprising, and is perhaps part of the vision that so many students voted for during the election that demanded an improved structure of accountability in GUSA to improve the organization’s efficiency. Luther and Rohan would not be the first administration to be too naive with their reforms.

As evidenced by Tezel and Jikaria’s self-reported B- midterm review of their administration citing administrative impediments to their long list of goals, it is clear that many of the ideals and detailed plans that previous tickets proposed have been tested and challenged by the realities of their term.

Luther and Rohan, although innovative in their approach to GUSA, are not impervious to the same struggles.