Knowing David Moon, I was very surprised to read his opinion (New amendment is a sham, 4/4) on the proposed "lobbyist" amendment. I would stop short from calling his viewpoint racist, but it was certainly race-baiting. Such low-blow political discourse at Tufts is very disappointing, whether coming from The Primary Source or leaders associated with the culture clubs. The amendment is a very good one, and deserves a fair hearing.
While commuter students could benefit from a voting Senate representative since it may be hard for them to vote in the regular elections, that is certainly not the case for students with "class, race, gender, sexual orientation" - and I would add religious and political - concerns. It is even less so for those involved in four of the best-funded clubs on campus: ACT, PAA, ALAS, and TTLGBC. All students are allowed to run for the Senate and, as Senators, work on projects they see would improve student life for all or a few. So, there is no reason to effectively give the students in these four clubs an extra Senator. There is even less reason to allow them to vote on their own and others' budgets, as they can now.
The amendment allows all groups - including TASA, the Arab Students Association, International Club, MOST, the Muslim Students Association, the Tufts Republicans, and the Women's Union at Tufts - equal footing with others in presenting their very relevant concerns to the TCU Senate. It will bring the Senate more in touch with student concerns from a wide spectrum of opinions.
So, I hope you will come out for the referendum on April 24 to support this amendment.
