September 11
commemorative
edition

 


Back to current issue
April 17, 2003 edition

Just chattin'

Hatch talks about war, land

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, speaks to students, administrators and community members. Hatch addressed myriad questions about policies and his personal life during an open meeting Wednesday afternoon at SUU.

By ELIZABETH MILLER
UNIVERSITY JOURNAL

Sen. Orrin Hatch, R-Utah, was at SUU Wednesday to express love for his job, share recent legislative experiences, and answer questions from those attending the address.
“As long as I’m here, I’ll do my best to serve you,” he said. “I give it everything I have.”
He expressed love for his job and serving the people of Utah. He also shared recent events in Congress.
“Last week was a very important week; we passed some very important child protection acts,” Hatch said. “The Amber Alert was passed.”
When the war was mentioned, Hatch said the media has provided a witness to the world about what young soldiers are doing in the fight for freedom.
“This is something that we can encourage, but it has to be the Iraqis,” he said about the establishment of democracy in Iraq.
“We continually send our young men into battle to free the

Featured Articles:

Students, staff should recycle to set example

To dye for : Vegetables offer a natural way to color eggs for Easter this year

'A cool honor' : SUU coach Bauman named Region Coach of the Year

Pornography debate continues

oppressed,” he said, quoting Secretary of State Colin Powell.
Following a brief statement regarding what he has been involved with the past few weeks, Hatch invited all in attendance to ask whatever questions they had, even personal ones.
Eric Kirby, a senior political science major from West Valley City, asked Hatch about Patriot Act II.
Hatch said he was the author of that act and that it was designed to prevent another 9/11. He also said the far-right and the left are both against the act because of views that it will destroy civil liberties.
“The act says you can get warrants to search terrorists when there is probable cause,” he said. “Up until the Patriot Act, you could not transmit information between the CIA, which is the intelligences for off-shore matters; and the FBI, the intelligence responsible for on-shore matters.”
Coleen Ward, a junior finance major from South Jordan, asked about the land settlements that were recently decided in the Utah Legislature.
“We have spent so much money on these lawsuits, but almost all the area around St. George is natural habitat and the desert tortoise stops everything,” Hatch said. “We can preserve our lands while still preserving people.”
Hatch said he respects those who want to preserve the land.
“Wilderness is beautiful and in pristine areas, that ought to be preserved,” he said. “One of the big battles has been preserving our forests.”
Jake Johnson, who spent time last summer as intern with Hatch, introduced him prior to Hatch’s speech.
“I learned a great deal about politics from him,” Johnson said. “Even if you disagree with him politically, it’s hard to disagree with him otherwise.”
Kirby will be interning with Hatch this summer in Washington, D.C.

Students oppose constitution

By KATIE ANDERSON
UNIVERSITY JOURNAL

The revised SUUSA Constitution was shot down in the student body general election by a 130 to 107 vote Monday amid controversy and concern from former SUUSA members.
Paul Shakespear, academic vice president, said the newly sworn-in senators will address the problems with the current constitution next year.
“We’ll fix it and run it past the student body again,” he said. “We’ll take the work that’s already been done and try to rework the specific areas of concern — namely whether to appoint or elect assembly delegates.”
Aaron Miller, former and current C&O vice president, created and distributed a flier Monday that listed 23 reasons to vote against the constitution.
It said the new constitution included “too many new problems,” “replaces voting with appointing,” “was written, ratified and put to vote by one small group” and “takes away power from the students.”
The flier was referred to as “propaganda,” “misleading,” “lies,” “illegitimate,” “childish” and “a serious misportrayal of the facts” by several former SUUSA members.
“It was completely one-sided and exaggerated to get the students to think,” he said. “Some of the things mentioned weren’t necessarily bad things about the constitution — they were just assumed to be bad because they were under the title ‘vote against constitution changes.’ That’s a marketing technique.”
Defining propaganda as “advertisements pushing a certain point
of view,” Miller said he agrees that the flier is propaganda.
“But I don’t think it was lies; it was taking things out of context,” he added. “And it did what it was intended to do. There is no harm in taking (the constitution) back to the drawing board.”
Former Delegate Oasee Malhotra said she agrees with the information Miller printed and is happy the constitution didn’t pass because she thinks the delegates should be elected and represent categories.
Former SUUSA President Matt Glazier said he was disappointed with the results of the election because of the reasons students voted against the constitution.
“I feel that a lot of people who voted against it were

 

misinformed — they didn’t read the constitution and went with the opinions of a very few, biased individuals,” he said.
Ryan VanWoerkom, Judicial Council associate justice, said he was unhappy with the elections for a different reason.
“I’m really disappointed they didn’t publicize the election and the changes more,” he said.
Former Sen. Jana Bulloch, College of Science, and major participant in the constitutional revisions, said the lack of publicity and the expedition of the election was a primary reason the constitution wasn’t approved by the student body.
“They weren’t voting on content,” she said. “They were voting ‘no’ because they didn’t feel . . . that students had time to become informed on it.”
Despite his dissatisfaction with the publicity of the election, VanWoerkom said the current constitution needs to be changed because “there are definite problems with C&O . . . and something needs to be done.”
“C&O bylaws were not being followed, the constitution wasn’t being followed, Robert’s Rules of Order were not being followed and (C&O) was stacked with Greeks, so I think there wasn’t equal representation,” he said. “From a constitutional standpoint, it was an unhealthy organization.”
Glazier also said the current constitution needs to be changed.
“The current constitution needs revision to be as solid as possible,” he said.
In the first meeting of the newly inaugurated senators, Glazier warned the senate to be careful while reworking the constitution.
“Don’t fall prey to propaganda and illegitimacy,” he said, referring to Miller’s 23 points.
Miller said he was pleased with the negative vote for the constitution because although he liked some of the changes, he thought the flaws in it were enough to necessitate the whole constitution being voted down.
One of the changes he liked was the broadened responsibilities of the C&O Assembly, but Miller said he didn’t like the things that were “unanswered, unspecified and left open.”
He also said he didn’t like that senate was in control of the entire constitutional process.
“The senate did too much,” Miller said. “They drafted the constitution, passed it, held the election and counted the votes.”
Former Sen. Cody Hughes, College of Science, and major player in the drafting of the revised constitution, said those are the responsibilities of senators.
“The constitution is supposed to be drawn up by a senatorial committee, and the senate has to vote on it,” Hughes said. “That’s outlined in the constitution.”
Former Sen. Chris Bodily, College of Performing & Visual Arts, and a primary participant, said he thought the problems solved would have outweighed the problems that were in it.