Culture rep voting has been a source of debate on campus since before current seniors had even sent their applications to Tufts. But while many students have expressed an opinion on the issue, Tufts Community Union (TCU) senators - who work intimately with the Senate's culture reps - may be keeping their lips sealed. According to some senators, those who do not support culture rep voting are simply reluctant to say so.
Outgoing TCU President Eric Greenberg acknowledged the general hesitance to address the issue, saying that "in general, it's hard for anyone to give an unabashed opinion about culture rep voting because it's a very sensitive issue."
Yesterday, the Committee on Student Life gave final approval for an amendment on culture reps to be voted on next Wednesday. The proposal would create a culture lobby to give more groups access to Senate meetings but would deny them their current right to vote on proposals. The system would be similar to the one in place last year - before a campus referendum gave culture reps voting privileges - though it would expand the number of culture reps.
According to one senator, culture groups' adamant opposition to the amendment makes senators who privately approve it wary of publicizing their views for fear of political suicide.
"They automatically see it as you being racist," he said. "They see it as a personal attack on them."
Current culture reps say that supporters of the amendment will silence the voice of minorities on campus. "I think the people behind this are being really condescending and elitist considering, they are masking this as a more inclusive system," said Kelly Sanborn, the Tufts Transgender Lesbian Gay and Bisexual Collective (TTLGBC) culture rep.
Though Sanborn agrees that the current situation is not perfect, she said the creation of a culture lobby would be unfeasible.
"The Senate will be a logistical nightmare if all 160 TCU organizations wanted to have a TCU lobbyist" under the proposed amendment, Sanborn said.
But senators like sophomore Randy Newsom say that an important dialogue is not occurring because of the issues's sensitivity. According to Newsom, many senators are simply reluctant to take a stand.
"There are a lot of senators who even if they did support it, probably wouldn't speak out because of the political ramifications about it," sophomore Senator Randy Newsom said. Newsom, who said he is in favor of the system the way it is, said he thinks senators should take the time to evaluate the issue and determine their opinions so a real debate can take place.
"If Senators would take the time and realize the people that this hurts, I think they would speak out even more against the amendment," he said.
While its supporters are quiet, those who oppose the amendment have been vocal. At the last Senate meeting, an estimated eight or nine campus culture groups came to the body's open forum to speak out against the proposal. Many in attendance at that meeting say it was disastrous.
"These statements were filled with personal attacks," one senator recalled. "A lot of them didn't know what the issue was and had misinformation."
Senators say that because the issue is politically thorny, an important ideological debate is precluded
"Culture reps are analogous to the movie Fight Club: the number one rule is don't talk about it," said sophomore Senator Josh Belkin, who has voiced support for the amendment. "A lot of people are afraid to talk out against it. The support is obviously there, but a lot of people feel uncomfortable talking about."
No matter what the vote on the referendum in next Wednesday's election, some doubt it will end the debate on culture rep voting. Any student at any time can file a petition to put a question about it to a student vote if he or she gathers enough signatures. It took just a year after the passage of the amendment giving culture reps the vote for a counter-referendum to be proposed.
"The issue will come up every year," Senator and presidential candidate Melissa Carson said. "The ideal situation would be to come up with one solution that everyone will agree on, but I don't know if that will ever happen."
"The amendment this year was put together without getting input from the people it affected," presidential candidate Alison Clarke said. "Therefore, people will continually have an issue with it, and it will keep getting changed and argued every year"
Both Carson and Clarke have come out against the proposed amendment, though they say there are also flaws with the current system.
Amidst the ideological conflict is a debate over whether culture rep votes and presence has made a difference on the Senate this year.
"I definitely think their presence was felt," Senator Nik Abraham said. "They were active, and they participated very well." However, Abraham said that in an ideal world the culture groups wouldn't need a vote since they would be adequately represented.
Some say the culture reps vote in a bloc, which could effect close decisions. "This has caused concern in the Senate because the culture rep influence automatically provides four votes that has the potential to sway important issues," one senator said.
However, few motions that the Senate has passed or denied this semester have passed by close votes.
The referendum will be held electronically as part of the presidential election next Wednesday.
Rachel Rubenson contributed to this article.
