Image provided by: University of Oregon Libraries; Eugene, OR
About Oregon daily emerald. (Eugene, Or.) 1920-2012 | View Entire Issue (March 7, 1973)
FSO tries to clear constitutional faults By KYLE JOHNSON of the Emerald Foreign students will vote on a proposed new Foreign Student Organization (FSO) constitution during spring term registration that attempts to clear up many of the faults in the present FSO constitution. The FSO executive board finished more than two months of deliberations on the proposed constitution March 1. The con stitution was drafted by several FSO members, including ASUO Vice President Fred Loveys, after a December meeting of foreign students voted a “lack of confidence” in former FSO President Davoud Davoudi and former FSO Vice President Abid Sheriff. Loveys had declared in late October Davoudi’s and Sheriff’s election invalid because of a clause in the present constitution requiring a quorum of 25 per cent of all FSO members at general assembly meetings. Loveys had been notified by foreign student adviser Larry Pittman that the election had been invalid, as had been the two previous FSO general elections. The new constitution reduces the quorum to 10 per cent. The new constitution will also change the election procedure. The old constitution prescribed certain procedures for FSO Elections, but the new con titution states “all matters pertaining to the elections” shall be left to a three-person com mittee of the FSO Vice-President and representative from the foreign student office and ASUO Elections Board. Like the former ASUO Senate, however, the FSO executive council (presently executive board) will “have the authority to approve or amend the rules, dates, procedures, to validate the results and adjudicate on alleged violations of these rules and procedures.’’ The new constitution contains procedures for impeachment recall, and voies of confidence. | Impeachment of an FSO officer Kinder the new constitution will require a two-thirds vote of the FSO general assembly. In a vote of confidence an official may be removed by the assembly if “a majority of votes cast’’ favor removal, provided the Executive Council recommends the vote be taken. Besides the ratification vote during spring term registration, foreign students will decide two sections in the new constitution that executive board members could not agree on. The first issue is whether to allow students with immigrant visas to participate in FSO. At a January board meeting, executive board chairer Ranjan Ray said the Indian student organization would not have been able to conduct its fall cultural program without the assistance of these students. Esawey Amashe also favored the inclusion of foreign students with immigrant visas, but felt the immigrant student was “undo* different pressures.” He said they did not have to worry about applying for a new visa each year and did not have to pay nonresident tuition. Under the present constitution, “all foreign students registered at the Foreign Student Office” are eligible for membership. The second section foreign students voters will decide is the membership of the executive council. Under the present constitution the three FSO executive officers and one representative from each of the foreign student organizations comprise the executive board. The executive board favored a similar section for the new constitution but it failed to receive approval from three fourths of the board members. The board had earlier decided to make all decisions about the new Constitution have a three fourths vote. An alternate section to have the council include “one represen tative for each 100 or fewer students” from each organization “with one additional represen tative up to two representatives including the elected executive officers” of the FSO was ap proved for submission to the vote of foreign students. Executive board members hope foreign students will ap prove the proposed constitution and hope it will prevent the problems of the last six months from occurring again. For student on board Final push begins By NAN HENDERSON of the Emerald SALEM (Special) — For the twenty or so university students who have been lobbying for student interests in the legislature, a Monday night hearing before the House Education Committee signified the beginning of a final push to get their “top priority” legislation through the legislature. The hearing — on a bill that would place three students on the State Board of Higher Education (HB 2147) — also climaxed months of intensive preparation by the students involving reams: of paper, numerous Salem strategy sessions and repeated discussions with legislators. The students have been aided in their efforts during this legislative session by Rep. Gordon Macpherson (R Waldport), a chief opponent of similar legislation introduced last session. He was the first of eight per sons who testified in favor of HB 2147. Only me person, State Board member Elizabeth Johnson, testified in opposition to the bill during the three-hour hearing. Macpherson told the com mittee that he doesn’t support placing three students on the State Board, but does support “the general concept of student representation.” The major argument against representation, he observed, is that a student would be a “con stituent member” of the Board and that if a student was placed on the Board a faculty member, too, would deserve appointment. Would you like a Gurateed for Spring Term? For a few hours of work per week (10-15) on campus, we will guarantee you <depending on your qualifications) $200, $180 or $165 (plus bonuses) Interested? Want more information? See: Amy, Rainer, Howard or Ed Footnotes: Room 15 in the Basement of the EMU. "The comparison between students and faculty is erroneous because a contract relationship is different from a consumer relationship,” Macpherson said. He pointed out that young persons also represent over half of the population in the United States. Two University students, ASUO President Bill Wyatt and University senior Jeff Johnson also testified in favor of the legislation. Wyatt outlined the present structure of the Board, ex plaining the rationale for the nine citizen members "who have been selected to represent the people in governing our public in stitutions of higher education. as major financial sup porters, and as partial consumers of education, the public does indeed have an inherent right to representation in this process,” Wyatt said. “There is, however, another group, which is also a major financial supporter of higher education, and in fact is the primary consumer of the products of higher education,” Wyatt continued, “yet strangely, this group is not represented directly in the decision-making process. The group, of course, is the student community.” Wyatt, too, addressed the argument of constituency Board members saying, “The word constituency implies some form of accountability. It seems to me ' that student board members would be adding, not a factor of direct representation, but rather the factor of perspective,” he said Johnson, representing the Inter-Institutional Union of Students, pointed out that the State Board adopted a statement in 1968 which says “students should be involved in the for mulation of institutional policies, rules and regulations...ami added “for a variety of reasons, we believe HB 2147 is the best possible way” to involve students in the decision-making process. Elizabeth Johnson, who stressed she was not representing the views of the Board, disagreed that dating students on the Board would facilitate more student involvement. ane told toe committee that student input into the decisions made by the Board is currently solicited on the “lower levels” of university advisory committees and asked what further con tribution students could make into the decision-making process by being on the Board. She said that the passage of HB 2147 would open the Board to constituent members, thereby signaling a “marked change” in the type of Board established in Oregon. Ms. Johnson also expressed concern that students, “who have a definite conflict of interest,” could become “a very powerful block mi the Board.” She suggested, as alternatives to HB 2147, the appointment of a student attending a private college in Oregon or a young person not attending any college or university. Rep. Larry Perry (D-Eugene), chairer of the committee, in dicated at the conclusion of the hearing that the bill will be acted upon “very early” during a committee work session. U OF O CHARTER PROGRAM EUROPE 1973 ROUNDTRIP CHARTER FLIGHTS TO EUROPE lf73 June 12 - August 18 June 19 - July 30 . June 21 • July 19 Aug. 13-Sept. 18 Portland-Brussels- Portland $299.00 Portland-Brussels- Portland $279.00 Portland-Brussels Portland $265.00 Portland- Brussels- Portlam $245.00 Additional information and applications available at International Education Center Room 202 EMU x3721 sy The dollar devaluation is corning! ...you can get sound eguipment and guitars 10 per cent to 20 per cent less than they will be next month after the devaluation begins to be felt!!! Avoid the higher prices - the Sun Shop gives you a way out with the great trade ins on your used equipment and an easy lay away plan. Save yourself a price hike at the Sun Shop
