It is no secret that members of our student government are active in other leadership roles within the ASUO, whether it’s co-running a student group, participating in the lobbying drives of the United States Student Association or advocating on behalf of a cause. If they aren’t currently involved, then chances are they were in the past.
This is understandable. Student groups are often the minor league from which student leaders are chosen. However, being an elected official in student government is also a responsibility – a responsibility that its members, who control how incidental fee money is dispersed, must uphold and respect.
They don’t always do this, as was made evident by Sen. Nate Gulley’s decision not to recuse himself from voting to give the USSA $2,000 from the Senate surplus account, which will fund a conference that Gulley will attend.
Gulley is not the only Senator who will be attending the conference: Sens. Chii-San SunOwen and Jennifer Lleras will also be attending the event. They, however, abstained from voting, as a matter of proper decorum. Gulley was asked to abstain during a second vote but petulantly chose not to. The resolution passed by one vote.
Now Gulley faces grievance charges, and there is no one on Senate who deserves this more. In addition to this event, Gulley is known for such “professional” Senate antics as swearing loudly during floor discussions when things are not going his way.
According to the grievance – filed by Oregon Commentator Editor-in-Chief Ted Niedermeyer, who was at the Senate meeting and asked Gulley to abstain – Gulley both implicitly and explicitly violated rules prohibiting senators from exhibiting a conflict of interest.
The ASUO’s Constitution Court should not hesitate to rule against Gulley. Niedermeyer’s grievance makes a convincing case that Gulley violated the ASUO Constitution, Robert’s Rules of Order and the Senate Rules.
And even the mere appearance of having a conflict of interest is enough. If the ASUO would like to assuage any concerns that it is simply a minor-league kleptocracy, it should refrain from all appearances of having a conflict of interest. Senators should strive for professionalism, which means not crying during meetings or hearings (which happens regularly) and abstaining from voting for groups in which they are involved.
Gulley’s actions were unpopular with the other senators, which is a positive sign. However, instead of merely verbally reprimanding the unethical actions of disrespectful, rule-breaking senators, the ASUO should take immediate action. Perhaps Gulley does not deserve to lose his position, but stern censure by an impartial jury of his peers might be a good idea.
Student leaders deserve an opportunity to pursue greater leadership interests within the ASUO. However, they must abstain from exhibiting such blatant disregard for legislative etiquette, decorum, ethics and rules. Those in the ASUO must strive to remain objective and not become mired in charges of having a conflicts of interest.