DSG officials acknowledge problem of `complacency'

Duke Student Government, known last year as an organization riddled with contentious debate and internal tension, has quieted down this year. But some fear that the organization has become too quiet, and that a lack of productivity hides beneath DSG's calm surface.

In a speech Jan. 20, Vice President for Facilities and Athletics Amir Rashid-Farokhi articulated this concern, urging legislators to "embrace [their] positions."

"We've collectively failed to be productive," said the Trinity junior. "Very little policy has come from us.... We have a very large responsibility. Just because we become busy [with non-DSG commitments] doesn't mean we shouldn't represent our constituents."

Other members of the executive board say the organization was "complacent" last semester, a concern DSG President Jeri Powell said was discussed by the executive board at a late fall meeting.

Little new legislation

The perception that DSG is complacent springs partially from its lower-than-usual amount of legislation. In fall 1997, despite internal bickering, the legislature supported Race Day, approved beer on points and passed resolutions for opening fire doors during move-in and pursuing a Tex-Mex dining option.

"Legislative projects this year have not been nearly as successful as they have in years past," said Trinity junior Ben Kennedy, DSG vice president for academic affairs. "Every legislator has done an average job, but not many are doing exceptional jobs."

Rashid-Farokhi said one of DSG's shortcomings this year is a failure to be proactive. "We've been content to deal with budget resolutions and occasional legislation," he said.

Trinity sophomore and DSG legislator Jordan Bazinsky noted, however, that behind-the-scenes work should not be discounted: "Don't allow a small number of resolutions to translate into not a lot of work being done," he said.

Problems inside the legislature

But the ebb in legislative activity is noticeable, and DSG officials have offered a number of explanations.

For one, last year's executive board was characterized by heated rivalries, whereas the climate among this year's leadership is calmer, they say. To prevent personal ambition from thwarting DSG's progress, this year's executive board was careful to foster comfortable working relationships early in the year. This effort, they conclude, resulted in an overall sense of self-satisfaction, with little incentive to change the status quo.

"The conflict of last year kept people interested and engaged. The conflict was a catalyst for activity," said DSG legislator Jason Bergsman, a Trinity sophomore who did not serve as a legislator last year. "In a more peaceful time, people do not get the urge to take action."

DSG legislative meetings are also more placid than in years past. DSG Executive Vice President Rusty Shappley said a new practice of presenting major pieces of legislation to each committee before they reach the legislative agenda is a probable explanation for the muted debate in the legislature.

"The same input is achieved," said Shappley, a Trinity junior. "It is a far better, far more efficient strategy."

Other DSG executives attributed the lack of debate to an inexperienced legislature: Out of 50 legislators, 20 are freshmen and only three are seniors. Some say the youthfulness of the assembly has translated into few successful "legislator individual projects," which all legislators are required to initiate and complete.

"There are a lot of freshman and first-year legislators who look to leaders to know what to do. I don't feel like I was getting good direction," said Stahl, who is serving his first term. "I think the leadership knows what's going on. I'd like to think that there will be a move to correct the void in direction."

Problems beyond the legislature

Many of the large projects for which executive board members claim credit were not conceived by DSG, although DSG members did participate in planning and implementing them. In an e-mail, Trinity junior and DSG Vice President for Student Affairs Sean Murphy praised DSG's contribution to University-wide successes, including Martin Luther King, Jr. Day programming and the passage of Curriculum 2000.

"It's not important who did it, per se, just that it happened," Powell said.

Of projects that were DSG-initiated, some-such as Safe Carts and the Don't Destroy Duke plan-did not bear tangible results.

"We do need to take initiative on issues, not just react to what the administration does," said Trinity junior Lisa Zeidner, DSG vice president for community interaction.

But Powell said DSG's change in focus is a natural response to the immediate issues, which provide less fodder for student government lobbying than last year's intense debates on alcohol policy, bonfire policy and the future of selective living at Duke.

Still, she was quick to add that uncontroversial times have not prevented DSG from accomplishing anything. "There's enough to indicate that we're not just playing a supporting role, we are initiating projects," she said. "Times dictate what comes out of the organization. We respond to what the issues are at the moment."

But others say the problem may not be a lack of issues but rather a student body that has not latched on to any of them vocally. The most notable exception is anti-sweatshop activism; DSG passed a resolution last fall supporting Students Against Sweatshops' goals.

"There is not a collaborative call of students for much," Bazinsky said. "It might just be that in past years there has been more demand for change from the student body."

Rashid-Farokhi, however, noted that legislators' projects should be creating the issues of the moment, not merely reacting to them.

"In almost all cases, supporting other organizations... takes precedence over individual projects [this year]," he said. "But individual projects make change happen and promote discussion and discourse."