This past week, Rachel Pilliod, ASUO president and chairwoman of the Oregon Students Association, weathered a recall challenge by Bridget Burns, student body president at Oregon State University. Burns argued that Pilliod had violated OSA rules by sending more than one representative to an OSA meeting, by changing a scheduled meeting abruptly — for which she later apologized — and, most egregiously according to Burns, attending and actively participating in the Oct. 31 McArthur Court rally in support of democrat Bill Bradbury’s senatorial campaign.
While the first two were easily explained away, her appearance at the rally could have proved problematic. Not because of her own political leanings,
but instead because of a semantic question in the OSA bylaws.
It all stems from Article I, Statement of Purpose, which reads: “The purposes of this corporation are to represent, advocate and further the interests and welfare of students in public higher education . . . provided that this corporation does not participate or intervene in any political campaign on behalf of any candidate for public office.”
On the face of it, this paragraph says nothing about the individual officers of the organization. By the letter of the law, unless Pilliod asserted herself as being at the rally in an official capacity as an OSA director, she had done nothing wrong.
Yet, by virtue of being ASUO president — and she was identified as such at the rally — she may have inadvertently tied OSA to a partisan political cause. Or she may have not.
The problem is, the rules are somewhat vague on what “this corporation” entails. We are heartened that the directors of the OSA have put together an ad-hoc committee to study the rules that concern participation in political events. Although the non-partisan nature of the organization must be preserved, to forbid any officeholder from ever espousing a personal cause is asinine.
We find it ridiculous to expect anyone — especially on a campus with as much of a reputation for vibrant political life as the University has — to stay completely divorced from politics 24 hours a day, seven days a week while holding such a position.
Certainly, as long as he is not doing it in his official capacity as University president, Dave Frohnmayer can insert himself into political debates. The same should hold for the head of student government.