The Associated Students - of the - University of Washington

Transcription

1 The Associated Students - of the - University of Washington ASUW Student Senate Session XX January 28th, 2014 Paccar 192 Call to Order: 5:07 P.M. APPROVAL OF AGENDA: Isaac Prevost says that before additions, deletions, or modifications, he notes steering has moved Committee Meetings to before New and Old Business as item 6. We need the approval of the Senate for this. Forrest Taylor moves to add R as new item 8. Seconded Evelina Vaisvilaite moves to add as number 9 a special order reconsideration of SO Seconded. Objection. Evelina Vaisvilaite speaks to her motion: Judicial reviewed the language and had a small recommendation to make to Senate. No further additions, deletions, or modifications. A clicker vote is conducted to approve the agenda The Agenda is approved. SPEAKER S REPORT:

2 Isaac Prevost says the first thing he would like to talk about is Lobby Day, volunteers will spend the day talking about legislation or current events, discussing the issues, and huskies on the hill is a good option to get involved. It's an opportunity to talk with your own state legislators. People can sign up until February 2nd. Kanokbhorn Saha adds there are sign-up sheets on the floor. Isaac Prevost reminds committee liaisons there are quarterly review sheets to fill out and turn into Russell. Isaac Prevost tells liaisons that if the meeting times no longer works for them, to let leadership know so Senate can find a replacement. Senators can choose to vote online as always. Isaac Prevost says senators no longer have to move to vote, just wait for 3 calls for discussion. This alleviates the problem of objecting to the motion to vote. He also says to make sure not to repeat something that's already been said. Don't rehash old points. If we're discussing an amendment, wait to comment on the resolution as a whole. Joke of the Day: What did Jay-Z call his wife before they were married? Fiancé. VICE SPEAKER S REPORT: Michael Zangl said this week was a mellow Board meeting. They talked about the ballot question briefly, but it was a low agenda meeting on Thursday. He reminds senators it's not too late to get involved in ASUW, like the Facebook page and take advantage of those opportunities. Any questions can be directed to leadership. Any ideas about legislation or questions can be directed to him or any leadership. He encourages senators to check our hours for when we'll be available. MEMBERSHIP COORDINATOR'S REPORT Mandy Humphries says that we've moved up to 15 constituents, which takes affect today, for new senators to become active. This means in two weeks they need 8 constituents to keep current status. At the end of June, 15 are required for the next session. It has limited affect on old senators, but she encourages senators to find new constituents anyway. Any questions about membership can be asked of her.

3 BOARD OF DIRECTORS REPORT: Ada Waelder is the featured board member of the week. Ada Waelder says that she's the ASUW Vice President and a senior, Political Science and Gender and Women's Sexuality Studies student. Next quarter she'll be a part time student. ASUW is currently full throttle, and Elect Her is coming up on Saturday! One of the cooler things this quarter she's done this year was Michael Kutz and her went to Utah to the PAC-12 leadership conference. After listening to all the other representatives, she favors our system the most. There are some structural ideas, but nothing quite as cool as our structure. All the Pac-12 schools have elected senates of people. Everyone's jaws dropped when they found out we have 200 senators. She's also currently reviewing several entities. The board noticed a lot of ways to improve their service of students, for example the A&E review group. The programing climate has completely changed while the program has remained static. She'll keep everyone posted on upcoming projects. Isaac Prevost invites other board members to the floor. Jeff McNerney says that something talked about at Board level is the bill proposed in Olympia requiring state universities to publish all of the universities departmental budgets. The administration is not a huge fan because they're worried the info wouldn't make a lot of sense. It's been our opinion based on the legislative agenda that any info available about how the system works is a good thing. Anything confusing is just an opportunity to have a conversation about those issues. Long story short, open it up and shine the light on it. If anyone is interested in passing legislation about the issue, initially they had to make a quick standpoint on it, which is why the board didn t consult senate. Mihai Ciustea asks what role could Senate have? Jeff McNerney says talk to him or Michael. As soon as legislation on the issue passes through Senate, it becomes the official opinion. Michael could only make that stance in the absence of an opinion from senate. Amber Amin asks what the sentiment looking like in Olympia? Michael Kutz says that people are generally in favor of transparency, but it's still in discussion. Jeff McNerney says it has 7 or 8 co-sponsors involved in higher education.

4 Kevin Shotwell asks given these budget are already available through the public records process, how valuable is this to students? Jeff McNerney says it's not available through any sort of normal course, it would have to be a request through the Provost who said she wouldn't feel comfortable doing so without permission from the Dean of the College, also. They feel as major funders of the university that they're more comfortable giving that money knowing more how it's spent. Patricia Allen says that the Office of Minority Affairs and Diversity is having a meeting with Provost Cauce next week, and anyone with questions about diversity or the budget should attend, The diversity efforts calendar will be available starting Monday, as well! She says she'll send out a final to Senate. Check out the ASUW website as well! Jeff McNerney clarifies that it's house bill COMMITTEE MEETINGS Isaac Prevost calls for committee meetings at 5:28. ELECTIONS AND ADMINISTRATION FORUM Michael Zangl introduces Brian Price as the chair for the Elections Administration Committee, which oversees the voting process for the 8 Board of Directors elections. Brian Price says he is the chair for the EAC, they just closed the application process and they now have their committee. He wanted to speak about elections, policies, and procedures that govern the elections. He wants to give an overview so people understand what s happening. The EPP Advisory Committee has a senate liaison or two, and they review the document at length. They look at changes, and those of you who were around last year know, it's always a growing process. They try to decide what could be improved on for the next year. The EPP looked at the old document and drafted some modifications and language changes, and they presented to the Board, and the Board sent it to Judicial. They draft the technical language, and they took the recommendation and will send it to the Board who will have the final approval. Once you see it, you'll see how much work is put into it. The EAC is the implementation of the EPP, because it sets the standards of what goes on during the elections cycle. There are rules explaining how tickets are formed, how candidates run and table, and the nitty gritty of elections. It's the responsibility of the EAC to hold candidates accountable. They watch for violations. Forums are also really

5 exciting. It's a chance for all candidates to come in and speak on their behalf, so you get to see who the next group of leaders will be. The logistics of the EPP have had a lot changed over the past years, some big changes like last year getting rid of food and drink giveaways. Nihai asks if that was ruled out? Brian Price says yes 2 years ago. Big things like that have changed over the past few years. The EPPAC proposed some interesting changes like shortening the campaign season. People will be out there trying to get your vote. They also look at campaign spending on publicity, and they want the race to be even in that regard. Violations are fun if you're on EAC or if you're running. A lot of common ones are candidates persuading voters within 100 feet of EAC voting stations. They want this area to be a neutral zone. No bribing voters, a lot of deadlines that have to be met when running, financial disclosure, etc. THis year there's talk of a new violation process, so if someone sees a candidate doing something they shouldn't, they can report it. This is a way to make the form more accessable to people. Campaigning is looking to be just over 3 weeks, crammed in there shorter than last year. The voting days are May 12-14, with 3.5 weeks of campaigning. It's tradition to create lawn signs, and you really can't miss elections. There are also rules about tabling. The EPP also outlines polling, instant runoff voting, endorsements, and special elections. Brian Price asks for questions. Sage Grinta asks about spending limits, the ones already in place. How were those chosen? Brian Price is not aware. Kevin Shotwell says that they were based on the first month's salary of the member being elected. Brian Price says the EPP will be out soon, so be on the lookout. Basically, elections can be interesting. April 18th will be when campaigning starts. There are a lot of good opportunities to volunteer. If you're interested in running, or elections in general, his office is 121F and he welcomes senators to contact him!

6 ORDERS OF THE DAY: R A Resolution honoring the life and achievements of UW Chancellor Friedman. Isaac Prevost invites the sponsor to the floor. Forrest Taylor reads the resolution. He speaks to his resolution, this is commemorative honoring the chancellors memory who passed away a few days ago, and it's important we pass a legislation honoring someone of her significance. Mandy Humphries moves to suspend the rules and place this on second readings. Russell Wiita asks what the last that clause does. Forrest Taylor says he would like to commemorate her memory on the websites for ASUW and Senate websites. Russell Wiita moves to vote. Seconded. A clicker vote is conducted on the final passage of the resolution The resolution passes. Judicial committee Update Evelina Vaisvilaite and Amber and Sage wanted to bring back SO-20-1 because judicial had a minor suggestion in terms of changing of the ballot question. They wanted to make sure senate approved of the amendment. The previous language read making various textual and organizational changes, and they wanted to change it to make it more clear for the average person. Michael Zangl says they'll take a vote. A yes vote approves the language. This requires a 3/4 vote. Russell Wiita asks if it's officially being sent back from Judicial? Evelina Vaisvilaite says that if passed it'll go back to the Board.

7 Kevin Shotwell moves to have the Senate concur once again on the SO with proposed amendments. Russell Wiita clarifies to vote yes is to approve the underlined text. Ryan Roulier moves to vote. Seconded. A clicker vote is conducted to approve the suggested language The language is adopted. Special order r Brigit Rossbach passed out the legislation with two amendments. Changing the title to A Resolution in Support of Greater Accessibility and Affordability of Higher Education, and adding a 4th that clause reading that the ASUW supports UW-Seattle Students being included in new income-based loan repayment programs. Second readings are opened. Russell Wiita says this is the product of the Debt Reduction Working Group. Mostly the policy part of that group, reflecting what they think should be some of the priorities in Olympia. It s a special order so that during lobby day the official opinion of the students will be available. It addresses lower tuition, the State Need Grant, then levels of the financial aid form the university to be maintained. Mihai Ciustea says it sounds fine. Kevin Shotwell asks the income-based repayment? How does it fit in the context of the resolution? Russell Wiita answers the income-based repayment basically takes out student loans from the federal government, depending on your income, certain programs after 20 years if you haven't paid them off the loan is forgiven. This fits in under affordability, this keeps students from being burdened by loans. Ryan Roulier asks how they determined who to forward it to? Russell Wiita says the people who thought they would be influential. Ryan Roulier says he sees Democratic leadership but not Republican leadership?

8 Russell Wiita thought he did. Michael Zangl says the income based repayment loan issue, a potential implication issue, there's a bill currently in the Washington state legislature that would establish a Washington higher education loan program, which would be state backed instead of federally backed. This would be at a lower rate. Michael says that if we were to pass that, they would support UW students be involved in the pilot that was approved that was meant for smaller schools. Bruce Adsero asks if this would alter the opinion on the Pay-It-Forward legislation? Michael Zangl says this isn't exactly Pay-It-Forward. Michael Zangl says the difference is with Pay-It-Forward, you pay x percent of your income for a certain time. This means paying off a balance with payments based on your income with a forgiveness period. Before this clause it wouldn't be clear about having UW students being involved in a pilot. After this clause it would mean including UW in a pilot. Timmy Bendis moves to amend the last THAT clause to Senate Democratic Leader, Senate Minority Leader, and Senate Majority Leader Rodney (before Sharon Nelson). Seconded. Objection. Timmy Bendis says Sharon Nelson is second because she's the head of the Minority. Russell Wiita said that when writing it, he took the titles from the state legislator website. There was an amendment. Timmy Bendis withdraws the second part of the amendment. Russell Wiita says this still changes Rodney s title, and he thinks they've got the leaders up there that he thought it should go up to. The President determines what goes to the floor. Forrest Taylor says there's a Republican Leader, Mark Schoesler. Timmy Bendis asks why forward it to Sharon Nelson if not Rodney Tom? Even if he doesn't agree, he controls the majority. Isaac Prevost conducts a voice vote. They ayes have it. The amendment is adopted.

9 Bruce Adsero asks once they pay off the balance of the loan, they are done paying it back? Russell Wiita confirms. Forrest Taylor moves to add in the final THAT clause House Majority Leader Pat Sullivan. A clicker vote is conducted on the final passage of the resolution The resolutions adopted. OLD BUSINESS: R-20-9 The chair of general affairs has left, but it's still in committee, as is R R Brigit Rossbach says that AAA reported it out unanimously with no amendments. Jeff McNerney speaks to the resolution: it is straightforward. Faculty are informed on changes to academic program, and they can comment on the change in tri-campus review. This would encourage administration to inform students that are in these programs of changes that might be made. He spoke to the registrar who was in favor of the idea, who said as soon as it's passed we can start hammering out how the notification will go, whether through list serves or another method. Timmy Bendis moves to vote. A clicker vote is conducted on final passage of the resolution The resolution is adopted. R-20-18

10 Ryan Roulier says that General affairs discharged it favorably with special instructions to try and split it into two different bills, and they're going to give Shotwell a chance to separate the two. One was condemning NSA spying, and the other was increasing anti-surveillance measure. Michael Zangl says a committee can't take action to split a bill. Isaac Prevost says unless the sponsor adopted it. Cole Peltier says it was meant to be an amendment, but he disagreed with it. Isaac Prevost says a committee cannot offer this as an amendment. Kevin Shotwell asks a member of the committee, whether there was one part they didn't like that they could strike. Odin Atkinson says the original part was a broad statement about NSA surveillance. General vs. specific, and they want to strike that. Isaac Prevost says unless it was voted to strike that, it doesn't make the motion. Kevin Shotwell disagrees that an opposition to spying program and the implementation to the protection strategy are different. He would be happy to answer any questions. Russell Wiita says it's important that in the THAT clauses, it's a cause and affect. Maybe the first that clause would be better as a WHEREAS clause, he would disagree with the committee. It explains why we would feel frustration. Mandy Humphries asks senators to state their names. Ryan Roulier said one concern of the committee with that THAT clause is a political statement, he thinks the resolution should just be increasing anti-surveillance measures in general and not specifically NSA spying. Timmy Bendis says being against NSA spying isn't opinion. Most people are against this. Cole Peltier said both issues fall under the umbrella of constitutional privacy. Katelyn Fuhlman said some people might support a resolution that condones NSA spying and they might feel that splitting the bill might be good.

11 Russell Wiita encourages someone to strike the first that clause. Timmy Bendis moves to strike the first that clause. Seconded. Objection. Timmy Bendis is opposed to his own motion. Forrest Taylor speaks to the motion. He thinks students are not concerned about recent revelations of surveillance programs. They do not condemn these programs. Kevin Shotwell speaks to the objection, he understands why people want to separate it, but if at all possible it's most strong and cohesive to keep them together. Don't get too political with it. Bruce Adsero says they should be separated, from an administrative standpoint, students having concerns about the NSA and wanting them to appose this is different from being more careful with their data in general. He thinks it's a bad idea to do these things in opposition of a federal entity. A lot of people nationwide think of this as a necessary evil. He thinks everyone can agree on being secure with data, and it's better to approach this as a general security concern. Nikhil Pailoor says the original that clause is vague in what it's pointing out. The NSA is a large agency, and it has a number of various legal justifications, and the purpose of this legislation is to appose something specific, it's not useful in this that clause. The nature of the resolution is focused on student privacy, he thinks the first that clause is not necessary. Overall he doesn t believe the first that clause is relevant. Russell Wiita says this was inspired by the first that clause. He doesn't think this would come to the minds of students without that revelation in the first clause. It's important to include the reason we're discussing this. Without the first that clause, it only says more security is good, as apposed to here's the reason. Alex Switzer says that in the second that clause it also mentions the NSA, so the first isn t necessary. Bruce Adsero says from his understanding a lot of critics of the NSA are from a secret court. By talking about the NSA specifically, you get into a lot of weird things. He thinks it's an awkward way of going after the NSA. It's better to be general rather than passing moral judgment on the NSA. Kevin Shotwell defends the vagueness of the first clause, if he were to outline the programs detailed over the last few months, it wouldn't be a good use of time or space. Reasonable people can infer this. You can't say the illegal spying program, because they all have specific names unknown to media or politicians. In general the UW does a good

12 job of data security from external threats. It would be a mischaracterization to say it's concerned with beefing up security. It's geared toward internal network threats that can only be put into place by a body with the force of law like the NSA. He thinks that his and most of the senate's constituents would agree with the first that clause, which is an opinion. Cole Peltier suggests a revision to the that clause, making it more specific to say that only such program that collect data without probable cause. Nikhil Pailoor asks under current US law, what potentially sensitive data held by the UW is accessible by the NSA under previous Supreme Court ruling? Kevin Shotwell says that the NSA claims authority to seize any record held by the university, which is debatable if they do have the authority. He's not saying they should resist the authority, but he's saying the UW just says they don't have the records when the NSA requests them. He could develop a better response in more time. Bruce Adsero thinks there are good things in the bill, but it's becoming an ideological stance against the NSA. The sponsor says two things that the university thinks the records should be encrypted to resist the NSA, while the university should protect our rights, they shouldn't appose a federal organization. There are other avenues for this. It's intent is to make the ASUW apposed to something ideological in nature. Timmy Bendis asks if we're talking about the amendment? He suggests a vote on the amendment. He moves to vote. Seconded. Isaac Prevost calls a voice vote. Division is called. A clicker vote is conducted for the amendment. Russell Wiita says a senator can only speak twice up to 10 minutes each time. Kevin Shotwell says that the 10 minute limit doesn't exist. Isaac Prevost responds the rule is informal The first that clause is struck. Eli McMeen moves to amend the title to read a resolution 'In Support of Designing Information Technology to Protect Privacy'. Seconded. Objection.

13 Eli McMeen thinks its a little more gentile and that it speaks to the nuances and addresses the common values rather than driving spikes between people. Kevin Shotwell speaks to the objection. He thinks privacy is a broader topic. He realizes frustrate mass surveillance is somewhat off-putting. He yields. Timmy Bendis says you mentioned we're trying to be gentile, but he thinks we shouldn't be subtle about what we think. Forrest Taylor says generally it's a good idea to be gentile when writing political documents. Russell Wiita is in favor of the change. It's been made clear they don't want to be aggressive with this. Leaving it in the title would be passive aggressive. Ryan Roulier moves to vote. Seconded. Objection. Ryan Roulier thinks we can move on. Cole Peltier says this is in reality constitutional and not idealistic. Citizens should be apposed to infringements of their rights. Isaac Prevost calls a vote on whether to vote. The ayes have it. Isaac Prevost calls a voice vote on the amendment. The ayes have it and the name change is adopted. Nikhil Pailoor agrees with the sentiment about the 4th that clause, but his constituents were concerned about it. How would this impact the relationships between the University and Cloud service providers. Kevin Shotwell responds that it has the potential depending on implementation to affect relations with cloud service providers. However, they are getting used to hearing this. A lot of times how it works, they contract requirements in negotiation, for example Google has to make sure the data is encrypted at rest. If they were to take a strict view, this would impact relationships with cloud companies, but they can certainly take a more moderate view. A clicker vote is conducted on the final passage of the resolution The resolution passes.

14 Michael Zangl says abstentions are used when you have a conflict of interest. You're voting on half of constituents, so it's important you take stances on issues. Brigit Rossbach moves to adjourn with announcements. Seconded. Objection. Brigit Rossbach says the SB is the next thing on the agenda. She doesn't want to rush discussion. Forrest Taylor says that he has a philosophical objection to leaving before finish. A clicker vote is conducted to vote on the adjournment. Kevin Shotwell asks if it's possible to adjourn with announcements? Isaac Prevost says yes. ANNOUNCEMENTS: Safety Committee is hosting a night walk to see the area to improve on campus. This is February 12th. Molly Smith encourages senators to sign up for lobby day by this Friday. Brady Begin asks senators to fill out a debt related survey. Patricia Allen says that the women's action committee will be having the Monologues. The vote to adjourn is Adjourned: 7:05 P.M. Minutes prepared by Kevin Celustka Student Senate Clerk