Connect with us

All Articles

Report From the USenate Meeting

It was usually rowdier than this.

Today, the University Senate held its usual monthly plenary meeting—but anything “usual” about it ended there. The meeting was held in Jerome 104, a larger space to accommodate the many guests, which included extra-stern Public Safety officers. In what was pretty much expected based on past ROTC businessthe Senate passed an amended ROTC resolution, effectively opening the door to dialogues with the military about a potential ROTC branch. Conor Skelding gives a blow-by-blow of the parliamentary bickering.

Anticipation and tension in the crowd was palpable at the meeting’s outset. Public Safety ushered Senators and media in through one door, and relegated people not “on the list” to a long line at the main entrance. PrezBo began the meeting by tabling the fringe benefits update until the April 29th meeting—to the dissatisfaction of a few professors—and kept the rest of his opening remarks brief. Manhattanville, he said, is going great, especially the fundraising, and there are “major new gifts” are in the works. With that, he allowed another board member to carry on.

The meeting proper began with an overview of the Task Force’s process, then of “what the ROTC is and is not,” and finally a section-by-section analysis—a near defense, really—of the resolution to be presented. After this followed a point-by-point presentation on why Senate was the right body to deal with the ROTC and what the Task Force had done well.  A faculty member and student each spoke for and against.

It went con-pro, and Bwog was reminded of Julius Caesar. You always wanna speak last! Very soft time limits of five minutes were set. A BSchool Senator notably went far beyond his time limit, and a professor cat-called, “He’s gone over five minutes! Me me me me me!”

PrezBo then opened the floor to Senators to debate back and forth. After two statements in favor, the professor who cat-called earlier identified herself as a philosophy professor, and made two motions: first, to amend the resolution to fix what she believed to be “openly biased” language; second, to table debate until April 29th.

The Senate floor subsequently devolved into open bickering: PrezBo and the philosophy professor were talking over one another, third parties were getting in the way, and there seemed to be no order. One senator yelled out, “We’re voting to do what we’re doing!”

Finally, one speaker gave an opinion on the first amendment, and then a Senator called the question. It was voted down. The same one-two votes were dealt to the second motion to table the debate—and this all took half an hour. One wonders how much Congress is like this…

PrezBo called for speakers again, and one zealous Senator shouted out a motion to call into question the ROTC resolution itself. His motion barely failed. Now when PrezBo spoke, and everybody quieted down. He called for speakers, and then another amendment was proposed that would strike out the first paragraph which reads:

That Columbia University consider whether it is in their interest to change their current relationship with ROTC. That Columbia is open to investigating whether there may be mutually beneficially relationships with the Armed Forces of the United States, which may include a relationship with the Reserve Officer Training Corps.

This passed without a vote as a friendly amendment. Another senator then motioned to strike out everything except for the original second operative clause which reads:

Be it resolved that Columbia University welcomes the opportunity to explore further mutually beneficial relationships with the Armed Forces of the United States, including participation in the programs of the Reserve Officer Training Corps.

A senator irately added, “I just want to have the discussion we’re here for. I’m voting to call the question [on the amendments].” It was voted on and passed, and that is how the Senate reached its final resolution.

PrezBo tiredly commented, “We’re done with the amendments. We’re done with the amendments, right?”

Right. Mr. Bo reopened Senate debate, and people started back and forth yet again. A Law professor pointed out that DADT has not yet been actually taken out of practice, and PrezBo assured him that no ROTC will come to Columbia until it is. Indeed, he added, “I think it helps with the elimination of Don’t Ask Don’t Tell that we are involved in this.” Sociology Professor Herbert Gans spoke, decrying militarization and imperialism—he mentioned that military officers said we wouldn’t be getting involved in Libya.

PrezBo then got antsy and stressed, “We’re coming to a time where we are risking losing a quorum as people leave.” He called on several more speakers and encouraged them to be “succinct.” After these speakers, PrezBo ruled by fiat. “I would like to see a vote. Is there a desire for a vote?”

One senator shouted, “Yes!” and another bellowed, “SECONDED!” A third senator tried to interject, “Can I just ask—” But this was quickly quieted by the crowd with a collective, “No!” Who can blame them? They were getting a little cranky.

The motion to call the question passed, the the resolution itself passed 51-17-1.

Almost as an afterthought, another resolution was passed without debate to rename the School of Continuing Education the School of Professional and Cross-Disciplinary Studies.

Then the senators ran out.

Click to show comments

Write a comment

Your email address will not be published.



  • One more vignette says:

    @One more vignette At the end of the meeting, one Senator started chanting “USA! USA!” and was angrily shushed up Lydia Goehr: “Oh grow up!”

    Regardless, today, the so-called “spirit of 68” died. Long live Columbia University!

    1. anonymous says:

      @anonymous haha what a tool. can we get a name?

    2. anon says:

      @anon Didn’t you idiots know patriotism is childish?

  • Yo Bwog says:

    @Yo Bwog what is going on on Claremont? Does anyone know what they’re filming?

  • idk says:

    @idk if you’ve heard but Marable Manning passed away.

  • also says:

    @also prezbo was the one that said ‘no’–it was not a collective no.

  • Anonymous says:

    @Anonymous When are the course catalogs going to be updated for next year?

  • Question. says:

    @Question. Why is the “B” in Bwog so tiny? Now the heading’s grainy and lopsided. yulch.

  • Anonymous says:

    @Anonymous Wow, the USenate sure likes April Fool’s pranks.

  • Philosophy prof says:

    @Philosophy prof Her name is Lydia Goehr, and she is quite rude and self-righteous.

    1. actually says:

      @actually I LOVED her “philosophy and history” class; her lectures were so engaging. Then again, I’m a Marxist.

      1. Fellow Marxist! says:

        @Fellow Marxist! Truth! I love self-important pedants! But only because I hate capitalists :/

      2. Not a Marxist says:

        @Not a Marxist and I still love Lydia Goehr

  • Ad

    Have Your Say

    What should Bwog's new tagline be?

    View Results

    Loading ... Loading ...

    Recent Comments

    If Your Childhood Favs Went To Columbia
    October 24, 2020
    Too much passive voice in this piece. (read more)
    An Announcement From Bwog’s Board
    October 23, 2020
    Yes I feel like there always is (read more)
    An Announcement From Bwog’s Board
    October 23, 2020
    LOL what? You are bwog, you are the New York Post of Columbia University news. I don't think any (read more)
    An Announcement From Bwog’s Board
    October 22, 2020

    Comment Policy

    The purpose of Bwog’s comment section is to facilitate honest and open discussion between members of the Columbia community. We encourage commenters to take advantage of—without abusing—the opportunity to engage in anonymous critical dialogue with other community members. A comment may be moderated if it contains:
    • A slur—defined as a pejorative derogatory phrase—based on ethnicity, race, gender, sexual orientation, ability, or spiritual belief
    • Hate speech
    • Unauthorized use of a person’s identity
    • Personal information about an individual
    • Baseless personal attacks on specific individuals
    • Spam or self-promotion
    • Copyright infringement
    • Libel
    • COVID-19 misinformation