Use the fields below to perform an advanced search of The Chronicle's archives. This will return articles, images, and multimedia relevant to your query. You can also try a Basic search
2 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
On March 4, Duke University Union and the Duke Student Government will be asking each student to vote on a proposed increase in student fees: an additional $11 per student for the Union and $8.50 per student for DSG. Although many of us (and our parents) certainly have the means to afford a $19.50 increase, students should view the issue on principle.
Duke students should join me in declaring a vote of no confidence in Duke Student Government. Several reasons: (1) The DSG president, with four years of DSG experience, believes the organization is ineffective and inefficient. 40 other DSG members refuted the claim in a letter to the editor Thursday, a day when The Chronicle appropriately announced on the front page: "DSG divided...." Such significant internal dissent can only point to ineffectiveness. A well-built system indeed provides for "crucibles," but permanent constipation seems undesirable. (2) DSG's propagandistic list of its major accomplishments was first laughable, then troubling. DSG provided "input" and engaged in "lobbying" and "supporting" for construction projects, safety initiatives, parking policies and environmental standards. Sounds good, but it all spells inaction. DSG allegedly "fostered a greater community" through 4 campus-wide events. Did DSG really think that using such lofty rhetoric would actually make us believe we now have a "greater community?" DSG also ran a canned food drive. When I was a Cub Scout (circa fifth grade), my pack organized a food drive that collected more than 50,000 cans. "Efforts to provide more funding for the multitude of student groups" were made, but who cares if Clinton tried to secure healthcare for all Americans? Nice try. (3) Students have witnessed numerous examples of DSG's outrageous lack of professionalism. Foremost among them was the spoils system appointment of this year's head line monitor, who supervises, sad but true, DSG's most influential function. Now, DSG is proposing sweeping changes to its bylaws based on poorly conceived, self-condemning systems like the "instant runoff" and the partisan ticket system. Oh, and of course, DSG is asking for more money.
