Several recent events have caused a large number of students to think about the role of student government in making significant policy decisions. The Daily has been abuzz with articles, editorials and op-eds about the on-going alcohol policy debate. The Oct. 24 op-ed by Tufts Community Union (TCU) President Brandon Rattiner, "Campus alcohol debate: Outlining the TCU Senate strategy," highlights some of the doubts I have about the efficacy of policy decisions through the Senate.
I agree with most of what Rattiner expresses in his piece, but I am puzzled by its apparent contradictions with his actions in the past month. For example, he says, "A good alcohol policy must not punish the entire collective for the actions of a select, fringe group," and I completely agree with this statement. It is important to note, however, that no one from the "select, fringe group" who caused problems at the first Senior Pub Night was punished in any way by the administration.
It is also important to note that by several accounts, one of the people involved in that night's disturbances is the very same TCU president who is calling for punishment of this select group when he says the policy should target "the extreme minority of students that believe drinking in excess is appropriate behavior." As a member of that extreme minority, Rattiner should be held accountable for his actions.
Another point Rattiner makes in his op-ed is that "no policy can ever do it all, and students need to remember that we must behave ourselves." Again, I completely agree that all students should behave themselves, especially those that represent our entire student body with privileged positions as TCU senators. I strongly believe that by accepting positions among our elected representatives, the TCU senators tacitly agree to a code of conduct. This includes not only trying to behave oneself, but also admitting when one has misbehaved. It is shameful that at September's Senior Pub Night, a TCU officer was "forcibly removed from line for what appeared to be sheer hostility," as Jessie Borkan put it in her Oct. 26 column, "You're the man." But what is equally as shameful is that this particular TCU officer did not feel the impetus to publicly apologize for his behavior.
This brings me to my final point. How can we have a fair voice on the Alcohol Task Force and the Alcohol Steering Committee when one of our representatives on these bodies does not best exemplify the standards of the majority? Beyond that, how can we tolerate our highest elected official acting unethically, hypocritically and inappropriately? Admittedly, as Rattiner says, "Freshmen, seniors, senators ... everyone has made mistakes," but there should be consequences for actions. A month ago, a public apology from the TCU president would have sufficed, but now that seems too little, too late. As a student body, we need to find a way to make our voices heard when our elected officials fail us.
--
Andrew Vincent is a senior majoring in economics and Spanish.
