Former SGA president rants on SGA impeachment hearing
By ARIEL O'MALLEY
Columnist
AEOSOO2@PSU.EDU
John Kenneth Galbraith once
said, "All of the great leaders have
had one characteristic in common:
It is the willingness to confront
unequivocally the major anxiety
of their people in their time. This,
and not much else, is the essence of
leadership."
During the impeachment hearing
on Nov. 6, the current Student
Government leadership failed to
accomplish this!
Several articles of impeachment
were brought to the attention
of the SGA. Somehow, through
clever wordplay, there was focus
on only one the issues: whether or
not Marques Stewart had broken
the constitutional guidelines by
appointing the members of the
SGA to committees within the
organization.
Sadly the elected "leaders" of this Penn State Harrisburg should take
campus lacked the ability to focus a lesson from University Park and
on another issue of whether or not create a new student leadership
the constitution was infringed upon organization that puts the current
when the president did not complete one to shame.
his responsibility by not allowing It would have been a blessing if the
Student feels let down by SGA
BY MATTHEW CARROLL
Business Manager
MCC22B@PSU.EDU
People who know me know that
I freely voice my opinion even
when I often times should be
silent. These people also know that
when it comes to putting words to
paper I resentfully do so, but the
proceedings that occurred during the
impeachment hearing on Tuesday,
Nov. 6 appalled my sensibility.
My basic understanding of the
basic intent of the hearing was
to determine whether or not the
president of the Student Government
Association acted in violation of
the constitution written and voted
in place by this and previous
administrations.
During the proceedings these
accusations were never truly
addressed nor were they judged
or voted upon on an indictment
by-indictment basis. The Student
Government Association rather
used the majority of the time in the
hearing to address personal issues
of character of both the accused
and others. Unfortunately some
of the senate made accusations
against members of the previous
administration who were either not
National Insecurity: Why
By MARTY SANTALUCIA
Columnist
MFSSOS7©PSU.EDU
George W. Bush is an idiot.
I did not support him in 2000, I
did not like him in 2004, and today
my feelings of animosity toward
his way of governing our country
have finally found the limits of the
English language. An overwhelming
majority of ideals supported by the
Bush Administration have been in
contradiction to rational thought
and in their execution have only
served to drive the American people
further from each other and any
opportunity of progress toward a
common goal. The damage to this
country caused by Mr. Bush and his
puppeteers ultimately fails to achieve
an irreversible level; however, our
children, and possibly generations
beyond that, will be re-organizing
the freedoms and values which
were thrown to the floor during the
these eight years. Efforts by Bush's
inter-circle to use national resources
and disasters for their own interests
are, of course, not designed for the
public's eye to scrutinize and are
only discovered when a lackey of
Mr. Bush (or Mr. Bush himself)
causes so much noise we, the public,
the senators to vote on the chairs of
the committees nor the members of
the committees.
He cleverly tried to skirt around
this issue by saying that the
committees were approved three
weeks ago. However the articles
of impeachment were written and
submitted over a month ago. He did
not have the committees approved
nor did he show any intention
of doing so until he realized that
it was impeachable. Having the
committees approved after being
served with impeachment papers
does not excuse your mistake.
I am truly disappointed at the
way the entire situation has been
handled. From the beginning, the
impeachment articles have been
leaked and discussed. At the hearing
itself, there was constant laughing
and talking amongst the senators
and a complete lack of respect and
maturity. The whole ordeal was
made into a complete joke. Perhaps
in attendance or not allowed to speak
during the proceedings.
In the end, the lack of decorum
and loose adherence to judicial
proceedings disenfranchised me to
the concept that our elected officials
are capable individuals of handling
my student activity fee involuntarily
assessed on my tuition.
During the proceeding it became
clear that the Student Government
Association constitution was viewed
as a seemingly worthless piece of
paper not even worth printing on
anything more expensive than the
cheapest toilet paper.
This creates a moral dilemma for
me when it comes to involvement
with clubs and organizations on
campus whose goals and ideals I may
share. If I join a club or organization
on campus, I do not feel that I will
be stuck in a difficult position where
I am required to follow not only the
club or organization's constitution,
but also be in accordance with the
wishes of the Student Government
Association's constitution and
wishes to have any chance of
receiving any funds to engage in
activities promoting said club or
organization. The dilemma arises
when I compliance to the Student
Government Association's rules
cannot help but notice what is going
on in the shadows from which they
operate.
This week, I would like to consider
whether a statement such as my
previous paragraph is appropriate in
the current climate of growing anti-
American sediments and the War
on Terror. Other than earning one
a ten year vacation to Guantanamo
Bay, Cuba, do comments doubting
and condemning the actions of
our government actually harm our
freedoms by 'emboldening the
enemy'?
In reading over my previous
pieces, I saw that I have frequently
questioned George W. Bush. I never
considered myself anti-American;
in fact, I felt that my statements
were very patriotic in the respect
that I was exercising my rights. To
summarize those past comments I
opened this week's editorial with the
points I have made in previous pieces
and will continue to pursue for the
436 days that George W. Bush is in
office (but who is really counting)
two more years in Gitmo for me.
Typically, I would approach this
in a very open manner and finally
come to a conclusion which lies
somewhere between the extremes.
On this topic, however, I can only
senators had acted their age rather
than their GPA for the impeachment
proceedings. If only they could have
been mature and focused on the
issue that they were there for rather
than making it personal. I am not
quite sure how the hearing became
about the character of Marques
Stewart or about the various projects
he has taken part in while being
president rather than the fact that
he lacked the ability to follow his
own organization's constitution. Let
alone the constant personal attacks
on myself to which I was not even
given an opportunity to provide any
sort of defense.
Then there is the issue of
legislating from the bench. When
did this become appropriate?!
Taking a vote as to whether or not
Dustin Holler should be allowed
to vote was not a kosher move!
Regardless of the fact that he
wrote and signed the articles of
impeachment does NOT change
the fact that he is still a senator
He was elected by the students to
represent the students. And simply
because he took the necessary steps
to express the unhappiness of a
portion of his student body does not
only apply to clubs or organizations
wishing to receive funds not those
who are responsible for the equitable
distribution of money rightfully
belonging to each and every student
on campus.
I'd also like to add that if our
current Student Government
Association truly reflects the student
body as a whole, I fear for our future
It is embarrassing to have my name
associated with individuals who
when given positions of authority
cannot set aside personal politics
when making tough leadership
decisions
Although this letter may be
insulting to some who read it, I know
that I am not without blame myself
and am willing to admit my faults.
It is my fault for not taking greater
care when casting my vote last spring
and I can only blame myself for not
running for office knowing full well
that I would be unable to fulfill the
time commitment necessary to serve
office in the Student Government
Association.
I applaud those who ran and serve
for their service and know that it may
not be the fault of the members of the
Student Government Association but
rather my own lofty expectations of
my elected student leaders.
say that questioning the government
and holding those in office publicly
accountable for their mistakes is the
only way to maintain those freedoms
which we are so often defending
add another year to my Cuban stay.
The subject is one of Bill O'Reilly's
favorites to go on about on The
Factor, a show I admittedly tried to
stop watching but missed the laughs.
O'Reilly claims that the media hurts
our efforts overseas by reporting on
actions which the public would see as
negative and thus manipulates public
perception to their agenda. The
truth is most likely a far less sinister
ratings game, yet O'Reilly persist
in his traditional good/evil way of
thinking. He insists that publicly
disagreeing with the government or
actions of the government is nothing
short of anti-American propaganda.
In a recent series of segments
O'Reilly focused on movies which
indirectly questioned the methods
being used to execute the wars in
Afghanistan and Iraq. While O'Reilly
paints this as a terrible trend, it is
exactly the opposite.
Historically, O'Reilly and those
who agree with him have precedence,
and at one point would have also had
laws which supported their views.
During World War I, President
mean that he should have his vote
taken away because someone feels
that he has a conflict of interest.
Marques Stewart's own fraternity
brother stood up and said that they
were brothers and "like family." No
one could possibly think that this
was not going to create some kind
of bias.
Not to mention the fact that the
voting in itself was corrupt. Thanks
to the advisor of SGA deciding it
was her place to talk, the senators
voted simply on removing President
Stewart from office rather than
voting on the three separate
articles of impeachment first.
She completely side-barred and
smothered the voice of the student
appointed Chief Justice. The vote
was taken that if one voted yes
they were saying that they found
Marques Stewart guilty of the
charges as well as agreeing that he
should be removed from office. The
proper measures were not taken
to decide whether or not Marques
Stewart was guilty of the articles
brought against him. They simply
moved directly onto whether or not
he should be removed from office.
In the United States of America,
Letter to the Editor
To the editor
As per your article in The Capital
Times, October 29, 2007 Students
speak out against ban.
First off I am not a smoker,
but have many friends who are
smokers.
It is a choice to smoke and to ruin
your own health.
Just like being overweight is my
own choice and no one elses.
The reason I am writing you is
because of this paragraph in your
article
" A comparison of banning
overweight people from buying
french fries to the smoking ban
here at PSH has been made.
Poyrazli sites that fat is as much
as a health risk as smoking."
A person being overweight in no
way affects anyone else. A person
smoking does affect everyone else.
I think this paragraph was rude and
uncalled for.
Many people such as myself and
skinny people have health concerns
that are aggravated by others
smoking.
Why should we have to suffer
from other peoples choice to
I'm going to jail
Woodrow Wilson pushed for the
passage of the Espionage Act of
1917 and later the Sedition Act of
1918. Anarchists and Socialists,
which held the government's distrust
and hatred in the same way that
terrorists do today, were targeted
and jailed for voicing political views
which the government had deemed
dangerous. Unlike the terrorists of
today, however, these early 1900's
Anarchists were often arrested
because they chose to, during a time
of war, "willfully utter, print, write
or publish any disloyal, profane,
scurrilous, or abusive language about
the form of government of the United
States or the Constitution of the
United States or the military or naval
forces of the United States, or the flag
of the United States, or the uniform
of the Army or Navy of the United
States" (Sedition Act, 1918).
I dare you to sneeze wrong under
that kind of government three more
years because Karl Rove really liked
that law.
Fortunately, most of the law was
repealed in the 1920's and finished
off in Supreme Court rulings by the
1970'5. A call to return to that sort
of legislation or standard troubles
me. Our government is designed
so that it is run by the citizens with
THE CAPITAL TIMES
an individual is not sentenced until
the parties' guilt is determined. Then
once found guilty, if one is charged
with the murder of three different
people, but only one of the accounts
can be proven, the person goes to
jail for the murder of the one person.
They are not set free with absolutely
no punishment whatsoever. I realize
that the SGA impeachment is
nowhere near the same as murder,
however the same basic principle
applies.
All of this brings me to question
how the rest of this year will
proceed. If the SGA does not hold
its own leader accountable for his
actions, what gives them the right
to hold anyone else accountable for
any wrongdoing that may happen
in the remaining months? As a past
leader of the SGA, I must say that
the road the current leaders are
heading down is quite dark and
dangerous. I truly hope they are
all aware of repercussions that are
bound to follow.
Josiah Charles Stamp once
said, "It is easy to dodge our
responsibilities, but we cannot
dodge the consequences of dodging
our responsibilities."
smoke?
I honestly think that the whole
campus grounds should have no
smoking.
You can't smoke at certain
restaurants, public places, or other
school grounds so what is the big
difference in not being allowed to
smoke on campus.
If the faculty doesn't like the fact
they can't smoke on campus deal
with it.
For years smokers have affected
people with asthma or other health
concerns with smoke on campus,
and we have dealt with it.
So let it be the smokers turn
to deal with it, and don't try to
compare obesity to it.
Agatha Lauder-English
Senior
Environmental Engineering
EC: To clear up any confusion,
the opinions expressed in the
mentioned article were not my own
but those of students and faculty
that I interviewed. It is the job of
the reporter to report all sides of a
story.
resistance strategically placed to
prevent spastic and knee-jerk changes
to the government and laws. Before a
person assumes an office, they must
first be hired by the people and are
therefore responsible to the people.
Removing that step, the official no
longer sees the public as their boss,
which really explains George Bush
two more years for me.
I understand that leaders must
balance what needs to be done and
what the public wants. This is a
balance, however, that should be
heavily tipped to the public's favor.
Struggles between the public and
the government are what ultimately
generate progress. Stopping that
process allows the government to
gain amounts of power which are
seldom returned quickly, if at all.
Calling the public's outcry against
the actions of our government 'anti-
American' is far more damaging to
our freedoms than anything an enemy
could do short of seizing control of
the government itself It is important,
especially in times of conflict, that
the public remember what rights
they have and that they continue
to exercise them to the fullest. Just
because you may not be on the front
line doesn't mean that you shouldn't
be fighting for your freedom too.
November 12, 2007
President's
Corner
By MARQUES STEWART
SGA President
• MEW 69@PSU.EDU
HELLO PENN STATE......YES I
AM STILL YOUR PRESIDENT.®
Below you will find the letter I read
at my impeachment hearing
As I stated before, when you have
support from others you can get
through anything
The drama that has went on the
SGA office over the last month has
been dramatic, I am glad to say we
are starting to make our way out of
it. Now to the litigations brought
before you, please let me take the
time to inform you about some miss
information
There was a sign up sheet passed
around in the SGA meeting last
semester as many of you can
contest
The same sheet was sign up sheet
was hanging in the office over the
summer.
I sent out an email to my Exec
Board as well as verbally stating to
Mr. Holler that the deadline for this
task was Aug 6 2007
When I sent out the committees on
that day, I literally typed them from
the sheet of paper into Angel
Later that week I spoke to Dustin
to make sure, he was comfortable
with them and he said yes
So I am being impeached because
I did not put the committees on the
Agenda to be approved
I trust in you to make the
responsible decision. You have read
over the impeachment charges. You
are all responsible adults and I trust
that you will do what is best for the
student government and student
Regardless, of what has happen
or said about me of the last weeks
or even since the start of my
Presidency, 1 have not brought any
personal bias into this SGA. As it
is quoted at the end of my email
Delegating work works, provided
the one delegating works too. No
one can say I have not worked to
make this school better.
Know that I have uncompromising
loyalty- loyalty to Penn State, Our
Campus, the Faculty and Staff, the
SGA, and most importantly you the
Students
Yes, some may say the SGA
image is poor right now...ACT
NOW AND HELP US CHANGE
1T...J01N THE SGA. If you are
interested in becoming a member,
please email me: ME551696-z)PSU
EDU so we can set up an interview
I promise to you that the image will
be change. If you have any ideas
please email me at the above email
REMEMBER this is your Student
Government Association
Thanks..... Good Luck in all
classes
-Marques