Original Article: http://dartreview.com/archives/2006/03/03/alumni_association_vote_fails.php
Friday, March 3, 2006
With each successive Association of Alumni meeting, the Dartmouth strappado draws nearer to the breaking point. The latest weight was added on February 12, when the assembled group of alumni voted to approve a new constitutional amendment by a margin of 198 to 32. This significant change to the Association constitution allows alumni to vote on future amendments through any medium, but lowers the majority of votes necessary for adoption from three fourths to two thirds.
The lopsided vote count is a consequence of Alumni Association President Al Collins ’53’s political shrewdness, including his obstruction of opposition. Specifically, the Association president ignored several petition amendments, including one that asked for a vote on the use of Robert’s Rules of Order, on the grounds that they were too complicated. Alumni needed “the opportunity to understand…the issues that will be addressed,” Collins claimed in an email to alumni explaining his rejection of the amendments. “Three amendments, each consisting of a single sentence, and a fourth consisting of just one clause [are] what the alumni of Dartmouth College, an elite institution of higher learning, would have proven unable to grasp?” trustees Robinson, Zywicki, and Rodgers asked rhetorically in a 2/10/06 op-ed to The Dartmouth . Claims that the amendments were complicated mask Collins’ unwillingness to sidetrack his agenda. For the executive committee, the proposed amendment was not to be discussed with alumni, but imposed on them..
By all accounts, the change to allow all-media voting is a welcome one, as it makes future decisions on the Association’s constitution readily accessible to all members. Graduates like Frank Gado ’58 have advocated such a change for years, so its passage, taken alone, seems like a conciliatory measure. However, all-media voting will be allowed only for constitutional amendments, not other Association business, e.g. executive committee election. However, paradoxically, alumni had to be present in Hanover to vote on all-media voting, and last Sunday’s meeting was brimming with members of “Affiliated Alumni Groups.” In what was surely no coincidence, “outreach groups” like the Dartmouth Asian Pacific American Alumni Association and the Dartmouth Gay, Lesbian, Bisexual and Transgender Alumni Association were in Hanover for their yearly meetings Their presence made the weekend vote uniquely democratic.
I say “uniquely” because, as explained in the Review ’s 2/10/06 issue, Collins’ bundling of the two amendments points to a single Machiavellian purpose: the simplified passage of a radically new alumni constitution. The democratic aspect of the meeting was a farce, intended to give the lowered standards legitimacy in case of a future clash on the constitution. Instead of allowing a separate vote on each of the amendment’s provisions, the wildly popular all-media aspect was combined with the controversial two-thirds plurality measure. (In 2003, a similar constitution failed to meet the ¾ threshold but would have succeeded had the 2/3 margin been in place.) Because Collins did not allow the meeting to proceed according to parliamentary rules, effectively barring changes to the amendment, it remains readily apparent that the amendment was not to be seriously challenged, despite the populist declarations of the Alumni Council. Instead of allowing alumni to decide for themselves which sections of the amendment to adopt, a single amendment was put forward for an up-or-down vote. Unfortunately, the domineering President Collins fancies himself the Association’s Moses, a deliverer of law and command to the unruly mob, when he more accurately hearkens to a lesser Balaam’s ass.
Take, for instance, his justification for the change in voting percentage: “We haven’t lowered the threshold, we’ve changed the opportunity.” That is, an opportunity to pass a constitution that blatantly furthers the agenda of the administration and its partisans. Amendments are an infrequent occurrence at best, so the controversial bundling of two separate provisions that collectively make it easier to pass a constitution that subjugates the elected Alumni Association to the unelected Alumni Council rightly raises a red flag.
But all is not lost. The all-media voting passage provides a unique opportunity for dissent from Alumni Council agenda. A band of alumni sympathetic to the College’s wellbeing could repeat 2003’s deflection of the constitution, this time utilizing the same New Media techniques that helped facilitate the success of petition candidates. However, if this mobilization occurs, it must happen quickly. To use Collins’ own words, “We’re going to move this thing along as soon as possible.” If that is the case, participating alumni must consider their Great Leader’s future proposals with a bit more scrutiny.