CCSC: Honor Code and Efficiency
Written by Bwog Staff
Last night was part deux of CCSC’s thrilling constitutional review session. And let me assure you: It. Was.
Thrilling. Boring as fuck. Admittedly, it was somewhat heartening to see the Council address issues that should have been addressed a long time ago, and in such a short period of time no less! To paraphrase CCSC President Karishma Habbu paraphrasing Hamlet: Efficiency, thy name is CCSC… sometimes.
Honor Code: In light of ESC’s decision to reject the implementation of an honor code, a few changes had to be made to the resolution drafted by CCSC Student Affairs Rep Steven Castellano and Committee on Instruction Rep Bob Sun. The council voted unanimously to include the new amendments – a version that has already been approved by the COI – so Castellano and Sun will now move forward with getting the code printed on syllabi/exams as well as planning discussions with first years during NSOP.
Constitutional Review: After a lengthy discussion about percentages and numbers and blah blah blah, the council voted to include a constitutional amendment that would allow students to launch their own ballot initiatives. The amendment stipulates that if a student collects a number (10% of the College student body) of signatures in favor of their measure, they can present it to the Council for a vote. While the Council reserves the right to amend the resolution before passing it, the new amendments may be struck if 10% of CC students disagree with them. In the event that the Council votes the proposed measure down, it goes to a student body-wide vote. Furthermore, these resolutions can include any recommendation, even, as 2013 Class Prez Ryan Mandelbaum wondered, “razing Low to the ground,” which followed by a collective, “Actually…”. The amendment passed last night includes further language regarding criteria for submitting the petition and the timeframe in which CCSC must vote on the initiative. The amendment can be viewed in full by downloading the document here.
All other proposed constitutional amendments were characterized as “mundane” either because they concerned changes in the language or were otherwise “out of date” and will go to an electronic vote this week.