College Senate Bulletin
16 Nov. 2001
118 Fall 2001 College Senate and Senate Committee MeetingSchedule
118 Senate Bulletin Mailing List
118 Election returns
119 College Senate meeting 6 November, 2001
130 Faculty Affairs Committee meeting Oct. 23, 2001
131 Student Affairs Committee meeting Oct. 23, 2001
131 Graduate Academic Affairs Committee meeting Oct.30, 2001
132 Professional Leave Review Committee Report
Correspondence: Janice A. Lovett, Departmentof Biology,
Bailey 210; e-mail: email@example.com; phone: 245-5413
Fall 2001 College Senate and Senate Committee Meeting Schedule
November 6 College Senate Meeting
November 20 Executive Committee Meeting
November 27 Faculty Affairs Committee at 4:00 PM inWelles 111
Student Affairs Committee at 4:00 PM in Bailey 211
December 4 College Senate Meeting
Senate Bulletin Mailing List
Any member of the College Community may receive an individual copy of the College Senate Bulletin. If you would like to receivea copy please send your name as you would like it to appear onthe mailing label and your campus address to the Senate Chair,Janice Lovett, firstname.lastname@example.org or 210 Bailey.
Faculty Personnel Committee
Donald Marozas 66 elected
Becky Glass 62 elected
Margaret Matlin 55 elected
Daniel Strang 45
D. Jeffrey Over 42
Robert O’Donnell 37
Rosanne Hartman 36
David Meisel 30
Hilda Pato 16
Kathryn Rommel-Esham 56 elected
Edward Pogozelski 50 elected
Anne Eisenberg 48 elected
Duane McPherson 44
Barbara Welker 31
Hilda Pato 30
Nader Asgary 27
Elias Savellos 23
Michael Lynch 21
David Robertson 13
Total Votes: 145 of 309 eligible voters. This is a turnoutof 47%. A 33% minimum turnout is required for a valid election.Congratulations to those elected.
Minutes of the College Senate Meeting
6 November 2001
Present: D. Anderson; J. Ballard; T. Bazzett; T. Book;S. Brainard; M. Brummell; J. Bushnell; W. Cook; F.K. Cylke; C.Dahl; J. DeCeu; G. Dingeldein; B. Dixon; G. Drake; M. Dunn; K.Farrell; C. Faulkner; C. Filice; S. Flynn; C. Freeman; J. Gill;W. Gohlman; D. Granger; T. Greenfield; A. Gu; K. Hannam; A. Happ;R. Hartman; D. Hill; T. Hon; H. Hoops; H. Howe; D. Johnson; J.Jungbluth; J. Kirkwood; J. Lieberman; M. Lima; J. Liu; J. Lovett; K. Mapes; T. Macula; P. McCarthy; R. McEwen; J. McLean; D. McPherson;D. Metz; J. F. Morse; J. Mounts; K. O’Gara; M. Putman;J. Putorti; K. Rank; J. Remy; P. Schacht; J. Sieffert; A. Stanley;L. Steet; M. Stolee; L. Taczak; C. Tang; R. Vasiliev; A. Weibel;C. Whalen; C. Wixson; Y. Zhang; J. Zook
Guests: S. Bailey; S. Babler; N. Duxbury; C. Easton; S.Frish; J. Grasten; G. Inzinni; B. Howard; M. Jadlos; J. Liles;B. Owens; D. Schultz. (The Secretary regrets that he cannot providea complete list of guests; the list here is a partial one andis based on the few guests who signed in and others who identifiedthemselves as speakers during the meeting.)
Call to Order
College Senate Chair Lovett called the meeting to order at 4.04PM.
Adoption of Agenda
T. Macula (Mathematics) movedto change the agenda to new business first (which featured a motionasking President Bush to seek non-military solutions to the warin Afghanistan) before the President’s Report. The motionwas seconded.
Dean of the College T. Greenfield spoke against the motion. Heacknowledged that a war is a larger issue than the curriculum;but what the College Senate says about curriculum and war arein reverse proportion. College Senate is the only body that makesdecisions about the curriculum; for discussion of world events,we have classes and open forums. Greenfield reminded the Senatethat Geneseo had fought very hard with the SUNY Administrationto preserve local authority over the curriculum; we should notconfuse the mundanity of our work with its importance.
J. Bushnell (Library) opposed the motion out of fear of losinga quorum by the time the Senate was ready to entertain UCC motions.She noted that people had worked very hard and through very latehours to finish the UCC agenda for today.
Macula maintained that the Senate is the only place where theFaculty comes together to consider issues such as the motion tobe discussed. Geneseo is an institution committed to higher learning,applying logic and ethics to solve problems. The College has toprioritize issues. While Macula was not certain when the nextSenate Bulletin would come out, he felt that the course acceptancesare a mere formality, and would not want the motion on Afghanistanto be postponed until the end of the meeting.
R. Vasiliev (Geography) spoke against motion. She was confidentthat the Senate would proceed to new business but believed thatwe should follow the regular procedures in our work.
The motion required a 2/3 vote to end discussion. Once the discussionended, the motion to change the agenda failed.
Approval of the Minutes of the Previous Meetings
The minutes of the College SenateMeeting of 16 October 2001 (College Senate Bulletin #5, pp. 50-60)were approved unanimously.
1. On behalf of the accreditation self-study committee chairedby T. Greenfield and D. Geiger, President Dahl thanked all whomet with Middle States visitors and all who participated in theMiddle States Study. The visitors confirmed especially the vitalityof our public liberal arts mission and the college’s needto foster diversity.
2. Faculty and staff appointments have been made for theDiversity Commission, and this work will move ahead.
3. The President said he was preparing a charge for the TaskForce on Evaluation, recommending a comprehensive system of facultyevaluation. The charge includes looking at what is done in otherinstitutions in comprehensive ways of evaluating faculty to helpGeneseo realign its system with national standards for publicliberal arts colleges.
4. The State Budget picture remains bleak, with no likelihoodof supplemental appropriations for this year’s budget.The Budget Call Letter from the Governor’s Office asksus to follow the numbers for last year’s budget; this istantamount to a $1.2 million cut, since collective bargainingagreements require us to honor all salary increases for clerical,staff, professional, and faculty employees. Dahl affirmed thatGeneseo has not instituted a hiring freeze. In addition, our responseto these developments would make the case that SUNY is crucialto the economic development of the State.
4. Dahl commended Kelly Clark and other organizers of CulturalHarmony week, particularly in the mini-conference on Saturdaythat joined the Week’s events with an investigation ofthe current “war on terrorism.” Attendanceat the mini-conference, however, was not what we would have liked.There are potentials for holding teach-ins and other activitiesin the College which we should encourage.
B. Cook (History) asked the President if he would publish a listof the faculty members on the Diversity Task Force. Dahl saidthat he would do so once the list of student representatives wasreasonably complete.
Provost Dixon drew attentionto a call for nominations for supported professorship awards. In addition to the two awards for outstanding teaching; therewould be a new award this year for outstanding research. Thismakes a total of seven supported professorships. Students, faculty,and staff would receive e-mails asking for nominations for theseawards.
The Provost also thanked participants for a great Family Weekend.She praised the poster sessions, mini-lectures, the honors convocation,the art show, and recitals. Many people put a lot of time intothe events.
Chair Lovett announced that all Faculty should have received correctedballots for the fall election. She pointed out a second errorin the ballot: T. Macula had been inadvertently left out of thenominations slate. Macula, said Lovett, graciously declined runningthis year so that the Senate would not have to send out a thirdcorrected ballot. Lovett added that she would appreciate havingmore people like Macula in Senate since he takes his commitmentseriously and believes it has a higher calling beyond the day-to-daytasks.
(For comic relief, Lovett shared a “butterfly ballot,” modeled after that of Palm Beach County.)
Lovett assigned part of her report to D. Hill from the AlumniOffice. Hill reported as the Chair of this year’s SEFAAppeal. Hill thanked colleagues for many pledges this year. Thepledge deadline would be tomorrow (7 November), so time remainedto make a pledge. Hill stressed that the importance of supportingSEFA charities after the events of 11 September.
Finally, Lovett announced that Senate balloting had been extendedtill 16 November.
University Senator’s Report
B. Gohlman said that he wouldpost minutes of the last University Senate meeting on the CollegeSenate website and put them in the Library as well; a synopsiswould appear in the Senate Bulletin.
Central Council Report
J. Lieberman reported as follows:
1. The Student Association would be presenting a check for$18,250 to the Livingston County Chapter of the American Red Cross.
2. Student Association Director of Academic Affairs JanetWells was looking for a Faculty Moderator to help with the CollegeBowl. Her email address is email@example.com.
3. Lieberman permitted Resident Assistant K. Rank to makean announcement about the Faculty Friends Program, which matchesFaculty members with residence halls. The time commitment in thisrelationship is up to the faculty member. The program’sgoal is to improve communication between faculty and studentsin a non-academic setting and establish collaborative relationshipsto encourage personal growth. Activities have included trips toDarien Lake, group discussions, whitewater rafting, and dorm presentationsby faculty. Faculty involved in the program so far include H.Howe from the School of Business; K. Rommel-Esham and S. Salmonfrom the School of Education; C. Leary from Mathematics; G. Hartvigsenfrom Biology; E. Daly from Philosophy; A. Stanley from Music;and M. Stolee and B. Gohlman from History. More faculty membersare welcomed and should contact Residence Hall Directors L. Annor(x.5771) or R. Baldwin (x.5933) for more information.
Reports of the Standing Committees of the Senate
Undergraduate Curriculum Committee
Chair J. Bushnell presented the following motions:
INTD 150, Study Abroad Slot Course (Bulletin, 31-33)
ANTH 247 (Bulletin, p. 34).
Minor Course Revision:
MATH 345 and 346 (Bulletin, pp. 33-34)
ANTH 209, 211, 214, and 301 (Bulletin, p. 34)
ANTH 224 (Bulletin, p. 34).
B.S. in Accounting, B.S. in Business Administration, B.A.in Economics (Bulletin, p. 86)
B.A. in Art Studio (Bulletin, p. 68)
B.A. in Mathematics (Bulletin, p. 70)
Minor in Asian Studies (Bulletin, p. 78)
Minor in Dance (Bulletin, p. 86)
DANC 304—Cultural Dance III (Bulletin, p. 95)
MUSC 316—Form and Analysis (Bulletin, p. 97)
Moved as a package:
ANTH 323—Primate Behavior Field Methods (Bulletin,p. 88)
ANTH 324—Primate Behavior Lab Methods (Bulletin, p.89)
Other new courses moved individually:
DANC 105—Methods in Body Conditioning: (subtitle)(Bulletin, p. 90)
DANC 340—Studies in Dance:(subtitle) (Bulletin, p. 91)
GSCI 348—Practical Hydrogeology (Bulletin, p.92)
HIST 230—Modern Ireland, 1550 to the Present(Bulletin, p. 71)
HIST 337—The British Isles, 1485-1714 (Bulletin,p. 75)
ARTS 365—Junior Portfolio Review (Bulletin, p. 78)
BIOL 342—Parasitology (Bulletin, p. 79)
CHEM 320—Physical Chemistry I (Bulletin, p. 79)
CHEM 334—Bioinorganic Chemistry (Bulletin, p. 79)
Moved as a package:
DANC 101—Ballet I (Bulletin, p. 94)
DANC 102—Modern I (Bulletin, p. 94)
DANC 103—Jazz I (Bulletin, p. 94)
DANC 104—Cultural Dance I: (subtitle) (Bulletin, p.94)
DANC 201—Ballet II (Bulletin, p. 94)
DANC 202—Modern II (Bulletin, p. 94)
DANC 203—Jazz II (Bulletin, p. 95)
DANC 204—Cultural Dance II: (subtitle) Bulletin, p.95)
DANC 250—Classical Ballet (Bulletin, p. 95)
DANC 301—Ballet III (Bulletin, p. 95)
DANC 302—Modern III(Bulletin, p. 95)
DANC 303—Jazz III (Bulletin, p. 95)
DANC 331—Dance Composition I (Bulletin, p. 95)
DANC 332—Dance Composition II (Bulletin, p. 96)
ECON 301—Econometrics (Bulletin, p. 96)
ECON 330—Government Finance (Bulletin, p.
INTD 105—WritingSeminar: (subtitle) (Bulletin, p. 96)
MATH 140—Math Concepts for Elementary EducationI (Bulletin, p. 79)
MATH 237—Introduction to Discrete Mathematics(Bulletin, p. 79)
MATH 366—Foundations of Actuarial Science (Bulletin,p. 79)
MUSC 100—Understanding Music: (subtitle) (Bulletin,p. 96)
MUSC 315—Studies in Music Technique: (subtitle)(Bulletin,, p. 97)
PHIL/EDUC 305—Philosophy of Education (Bulletin,p. 97)
PHIL 393—Honors Thesis (Bulletin, p. 80)
Greenfield inquired about the INTD 105 course. He wondered whethera [non-Library] Faculty Member could offer this unit exclusiveof the Library Staff; was it correct that this option had beenremoved for faculty, and what was the gist of this discussionin UCC? Bushnell explained that UCC did not discuss this; theproposal came from the Library faculty. Lovett concluded thatthe proposal, as written, would be restricted to Library Faculty.
Moved as a package:
SOCL 211—Statistics for Social Research (Bulletin,p. 97)
SOCL 213—Sociology of Medicine (Bulletin, p. 80)
SOCL 215—Women and Law (Bulletin, p. 80)
SOCL 220—Inequality,Class and Poverty (Bulletin, p. 80)
SOCL 347—Criminology (Bulletin, p. 81)
SOCL 230—Race and Ethnicity (Bulletin, p. 80)
SOCL 325—Global Social change (Bulletin, p. 80)
All of the above motions passed unanimously.
Finally, the following U.S. HistoryCore courses were moved as a package: HIST 155,
HIST 161, HIST 162, HIST 166, HIST 250, HIST 260, HIST 261, HIST264, INTD 203 (Bulletin, p. 97)
W. Gohlman objected to considerationof this motion and moved its removal for consideration. Last year,the Policy Committee almost unanimously agreed not to send thismotion to UCC since it would imply the Trustees’ impositionof the requirement on us without our approval.
J. Remy reminded the Senate that the motion was not open to debate.The motion must be voted on immediately as proposed; an objectionwould require a 2/3 vote. The motion was passed, and thus theproposal was removed from consideration.
Greenfield asked for a precise count. Lovett reminded the Senatethat only Senators could vote and that a 2/3 vote would approvethe removal of the motion. The motion carried 35-8 with 9 abstentions.
Greenfield added, as a point of information, that since the HistoryCore Courses remain in legislative limbo, the Dean’s Officewould take the liberty of approving them for core for advisementpurposes.
Undergraduate Academic Policies Core and Review
Committee Chair C. Filice (Philosophy)presented the following motion to the Senate (see Senate Bulletin,p. 81):
Audition Requirements for admission to programs in PerformingArts:
An audition shall be required for admission to the followingSchool of Performing Arts programs: Majors in Music, Musical Theater,Theater, Theater/English; Minors in Piano Pedagogy, Dance; concentration(for education majors) in Dance.
Filice pointed out that this is not a change in practice, onlyin official policy.
The motion passed unopposed.
Graduate Academic Affairs Committee
D. Metz said that GAAC had meton 30 October and passed the motions for course proposals thatSenate now voted upon:
New Course: CDSc 465 Hearing Problems (Bulletin, p.98)
Revised Course: CDSc 443 Linguistic Phonological Disorders(Bulletin, p. 100)
Revised Course: CDSc 445 Language Intervention withPersons with Severe Impairment (Bulletin, p. 104)
Revised Program Proposal:M.A. in Speech Pathology (Bulletin, p. 108)
All of these motions passed unanimously.
Student Affairs Committee
D. McPherson said that the Committeehad convened on 23 October. The Committee discussed the S.A.F.E.Transport/ Knight Rider System, Officer Dan Rebben?? [Jan, I couldnot find an officer named this, and I've emailed Duane askinghim to clarify] gave background on the present system; and theCommittee continued discussion on alternatives connected withthis service.
The next Committee meeting would take place on Tuesday, 27 Novemberat 4PM in Bailey 211.
Faculty Affairs Committee
J. McLean announced that theCommittee had been organizing brown-bag lunches on Diversity inTeaching and Learning. Irene Belyakov, ESL Instructor, would speakon English as a Second Language students at 12.45PM on 29 Novemberin Welles 123. The first discussion next semester would be withTabitha Buggie-Hunt, Director of Disability Services, on assistingspecial-needs students.
There was no old business.
T. Macula moved the following:
"Whereas, several less violent alternatives have not been attemptedand international legal recourse has not been completely explored;and
Whereas, many innocent civilians are being killed or injured;and
Whereas, ill will toward the United States is being fomented;and
Whereas, the stated goal of wiping out terrorism by waging warin Afghanistan has little likelihood of succeeding; therefore
RESOLVED: that the Senate of the SUNY Geneseo call upon PresidentBush and his administration to cease waging war in Afghanistanuntil all non-violent and legal avenues to combating terrorismin that region have been exhausted."
M. Lima emphasized how it importantit was for the Senate to send a message to the Administrationthat it is wrong to wage war on a people for an individual’s acts; there are better ways to fight terrorism. Bombing duringRamadan will create unthinkable responses. Lima commended Macula’s wisdom for introducing the motion.
Dean Greenfield asked Lima to clarify the Administration to whomwe are sending this message. Lima pointed to the resolution’s invocation of President Bush.
J. Remy moved to postpone the motion indefinitely since it wasoutside the Senate’s scope. The motion was seconded.
Visitor S. Babler spoke for other student visitors when he askedthem to raise their hands to identify their numbers at the meeting.Babler felt that the Senate should at least have a discussionon the issue before it was put to rest. Not to do so would beunfair to students who have taken time out from classes and otherwork to attend.
N. Duxbury, Chair of Council, argued for postponing. She feltthat it is not the role of a public liberal arts college to makea complete statement for the entire constituency of the College;more opinions need to be taken.
K. Cylke (Sociology) pointed to relevant language in the SenateConstitution that make the motion part of the senate’sscope. He also reminded the Senate that, in 1989, many collegesand institutions passed resolutions condemning the Gulf War. Thus,there is a national precedent as well as clear constitutionalpermission.
Remy had polled 100 students about the motion, and the majorityfelt that the motion was inappropriate, since it is not the purposeof the College to arrogantly legislate their own opinions intolaw; Remy saw this law as contradictory to the College’s public education mission. What kind of institution (especiallygiven the national reputation that Geneseo has achieved) hindersthe right to think and render opinions of one’s own thequoted mission of college? How could this resolution develop sociallyresponsible citizens? Remy supported open forums on war; formalresolutions, no. Students and faculty should have liberty to thinkand reason on their own.
Macula countered that the resolution was not on the part of theCollege, but on behalf of the College Senate. As to whether toconsider it, he repeated that Geneseo was an institution of higherlearning that applied logic and ethics to problems; this resolutionallowed us to do this as a body. Whether or not it would be appropriateis moot; the motion was now on the agenda.
J. Grasten (Visitor) noted that, by turning down the resolutionwithout debate, we undermine the purpose of an academic institution.Many institutions, including Dahl’s alma mater, Yale University,had made statements about the war and had thus set a precedent.
Filice said that the appropriate time to vote for or against themotion was when its contents came to an actual yes-or-no vote.Yes, some people on campus would be against it. And that wouldbe the nature of democracy: majorities prevail in policymaking.
H. Howe from the School of Business objected to language in theresolution’s last paragraph that had the Senate of thewhole College call on President Bush. A number of Senate’s constituents would want to disassociate themselves from theblanket wording of Senate as a body; this did not reflect thequality of thinking that went on here.
M. Brummell (Student Senator) said that if the Senate discussedthe resolution but did not all agree on it, this would not bethe first time that this happened. Brummell appealed for a discussionbefore actually voting on the motion.
R. Vasiliev noted that Senators represented their departmentsor other constituencies in the College. Vasiliev called for postponingdiscussion so that Senators could discuss the motion with thosethey represent to get a better sense of opinion at the College.
Greenfield agreed with Vasiliev and said he was struck by thespeed of the motion. He confessed his confusion over the alacrityof the discussion as opposed to thoughtfulness, as opposed tofinding a consensus. Why should speed be so important for sucha profoundly moral statement?
C. Faulkner (History), wanted to know if the Senate could workon the wording of the resolution. She was sympathetic to partsof this motion but also wanted to resolve to condemn the Talibanfor killing innocent civilians and oppression of women.
Lovett explained that, if we discussed the motion, amendmentscould be made, and if they were significant, amendments couldbe sent to a committee.
T. McLean asked whether the motion was simply meant to postponeor to postpone indefinitely. Remy replied that the resolutionitself had been considered by the Policy Committee.
J. Morse (School of Education) pointed out that the motion hadbeen presented in Committee and published in the College SenateBulletin for its consideration; now the motion was appearing ina different body, the Senate. It would be appropriate to discussthis in this body now.
D. Schultz (visitor) warned that refusal to take up this motionfor discussion amounts to sanctioning the terror our militaryis wreaking on Afghanistan.
W. Cook (History) asked for a point of information. If Senaterejected this motion, then the motion’s tabling would bevalid. What were the procedures for motion to table? Remy repliedthat a motion to lay on the table is neither debatable nor amendableand requires a majority vote to bring back to table. If the motionis not brought back to the table at the meeting in which it ispresented, the motion itself dies and can be re-presented atanother meeting.
Macula noted that the urgency of this motion was explained inthe second paragraph.
D. McPherson was concerned that this discussion was taking timeaway from actually considering its contents.
The question was called. The Senate voted on whether to postponediscussion of the motion indefinitely. The motion required a 2/3majority. Senators voted by paper ballot. The results:
The motion to postpone indefinitely was defeated.
The Senate now turned to discussing Macula’s resolution.
Macula spoke again in favor of the motion. He said it was importantthat the U.S. try less violent alternatives; the Senate shouldsend some sort of message (from ourselves as a body dedicatedto the application of logic) to our government. It is not a motioncompletely against war or against military; it is a motion todo legal things first, and maybe we will save some lives.
Remy asked if Macula would yield to a question, and he agreed.Remy then asked how Macula would propose enforcing legal measuresagainst an international terrorist organization that has no representationin a legislative deliberative body? Macula replied that, for example,by taking someone to court, the U.S. could lay out evidence againstthat individual. But the U.S. was not currently doing this.
J. Gill (Student Senator) recalled that she was appointed to representthe Student Body. What mattered was how students felt. She wassure that not all students feel the same way on the matter. Shedid not see herself in a position to vote for this motion.
C. Whalen (Student Senator) called it inappropriate to legislatein this matter, and she wished that more faculty would discussthis matter in their classrooms, not just on FACTALK or in Senate.We need to share this discussion more on campus.
S. Babler recalled that the previous Student Senator did not believethat the Senate functioned as a representative body. Yet a representativebody works through representatives who speak for people, and thatis what the Senate is doing.
McPherson said that Whalen raised an important point on bringingreal-world issues into the classroom. This motion is a step towardsgreater engagement of the College Community in the real worldand dissolves walls that develop between academy and the realworld. Thus, we can benefit from discussion.
S. Flynn, Student Senator admitted that, while this motion hadbeen published, he didn't know what the Student Body thought,and therefore did not feel comfortable voting on the proposedmotion.
J. Grasten said that he had learned from his political sciencecourses that an elected body is not just a barometer of publicopinion, but a body chosen by people to make decisions for themthrough the wisdom of representatives. Grasten went on to saythat life in Afghanistan even before 10 September was threatened.At that time, only 12-13% of Afghanistan had any sanitation orwater at all—not even clean water. 70% of the populationis suffering malnutrition; one out of every four children diedbefore the age of five; one out of every four survivors sufferedfrom moderate to severe wasting of muscle-flesh ratio. Afghanshad the world’s fourth-worst maternal death rate; currentfood drops cannot even feed a third of current daily needs. AndCNN reported that seven million Afghans would die from exposure.
J. Remy replied that if the faculty and students would like toget views of their colleagues, they had the right to postponethis motion to a certain time, and they should feel free to postponethis to a certain time.
H. Howe spoke against the resolution. He prefaced his marks byacknowledging his respect for the moral sentiment of those whodrafted the resolution. He called for rational scrutiny of thetext as written. The Senate was being asked to endorse an agreementthat less violent alternatives exist. The Senate was being calledupon to make judgments about such things as ill-will towards theU.S., towards military plans currently underway when certain ofour citizens are in harm’s way. This motion as writtendeserved, he said, to be defeated.
Lima asked whether the Senate could bring the resolution to thefloor at the next meeting in order to give Senators time to gatherfeedback from constituents. She then moved to postpone the motionuntil that next meeting (scheduled for 4 December).
Vasiliev wanted to know if and how it would be possible to changethe wording of the resolution. Macula said that if the motionwere postponed, friendly amendments could be entertained.
K. Cylke said that, if the wording is objectionable, a substituteresolution could be drafted between now and then and could besubstituted for the current motion.
Dahl called for a point of order: if the motion were to be postponed,the clock would stop, it stops the clock; we could discuss itagain after friendly amendments and substitute motions are entered,correct? Remy concurred.
Macula said that he understood Senators’ sentiments forseeking clarity on opinions. He said that he would support sucha delay if it can appear first on the agenda. (Senators foundthis amusing.) Dahl said it would become old business.
Filice spoke against postponing. There is urgency in the action,and there is a disaster going on. Remy replied that Filice couldamend the motion to include a special meeting. (This producedloud dissent from the Chair and others.)
S. Babler asked what methods would be used by Student Senatorsto gather information if the motion were postponed. C. Whalendescribed the standard procedures the Student Association woulduse.
M. Brummell noted that many students do not attend the caucusmeetings that Whalen described, so she would be calling on CentralCouncil to vote on this resolution with some amendments. Brummelldid not think the resolution was about emotion; it was about makinga statement to President Bush. She called it a thoughtful resolution,and urged.
J. Lieberman wondered what bringing this matter to Central Councilwould entail: passing a resolution, passing this resolution, oropening it up to discussion? Lovett replied that the procedurewould be up to Central Council.
G. Inzinni (Visitor) agreed with Filice that the matter is urgent.A Senator’s duties include gathering opinions from constituents.Senators who do not do so should consider not being Senators.
R. Vasiliev said that she did not learn of the Afghanistan resolutionuntil it showed up recently in her mailbox. She thought that manystudents had not seen the resolution yet. In addition, althoughmany agree with the sentiment of the resolution, the Senate needssome time to think and talk about the wording.
Remy moved the previous question. Another 2/3 vote was necessaryto end discussion. The Senate now voted on the motion to postponeaction on the Afghanistan resolution until the next College Senatemeeting. This motion carried.
The Senate moved to adjourn at 5.41 PM.
Graham N Drake
College Senate Secretary