Over the past year, several students have written columns on this page regarding same-sex “marriage” — columns often resulting in much discussing and cussing on our online feedback boards. In Wisconsin, this issue has received increasing attention as the legislature prepares to send the issue to the voters in a statewide referendum.

Last week, several Associated Students of Madison (ASM) representatives decided to weigh in on the controversial issue, not only sharing their opinions, but using their capacity as student government representatives to draft, formally debate and eventually pass a resolution opposing the proposed amendment to the Wisconsin Constitution. They did this despite having any jurisdiction or authority over the wording or passage of such an amendment through the state legislature. Put simply, their resolution has no concrete impact.

Students having little familiarity with their student government, ASM, probably find it surprising that their elected representatives would want to waste time drafting and debating symbolic resolutions. After all, this probably seems about as crazy as the Madison City Council arguing and passing a resolution opposing the war in Iraq.

Actually, the Madison City Council did pass such a resolution in November 2002, but were unable to stop the war four months later. Although the analogy fails, this example also illustrates the philosophy contagiously present among certain individuals on various governing bodies within Madison. Some members appear to see themselves, perhaps arrogantly, as members of a prominent and distinguished club or organization with uniform thought, rather than elected officials on a small governing body which represents constituents of diverse viewpoints.

Defending his sponsorship of the resolution, ASM Secretary and Letters and Science Representative Adam Schlicht wrote me saying, “Regardless of the fact that I strongly oppose the proposed constitutional amendment and voted in favor of the ASM resolution, my primary reason for sponsoring this legislation was my belief that it is the right and responsibility of the ASM Student Council to consider all matters that affect the lives and education of students here at Madison.”

Schlicht continued, “Specifically, the state constitutional amendment will have a very significant effect on the diversity of educators attracted to UW-Madison. Furthermore, such an issue is debatable by the Student Council because of its effect on campus climate, which impacts every student here at UW daily. As the voice of the collective student body, it is ASM’s responsibility to consider and debate such issues in order to effectively represent all students.”

Schlicht concluded by encouraging students to attend ASM’s town hall meeting, held tonight at 6 p.m. in Tripp Commons.

In his comments, Schlicht claims the legislation will affect both educators and students on this campus. However, many pieces of state and federal legislation likewise impact students — more than ASM can ever hope to cover in their Wednesday biweekly meetings, particularly if they take time on issues within their jurisdiction. Furthermore, the legislature’s action does not even guarantee the constitutional amendment; rather, it allows voters to decide.

In considering this divisive issue, some ASM representatives chose to speak as the voice of “the collective student body,” claiming to represent the multiple viewpoints on this campus in the same way they have done in past sessions on other issues. Two sessions ago, ASM representatives debated a resolution supporting the Patriot Act. Last session and earlier this year, ASM representatives passed a resolution opposing the Patriot Act.

Which of these two resolutions spoke as “the voice of the collective student body”? Which resolution affected the status of the Patriot Act as law in the United States? The answer to both of these questions: neither.

Earlier this year, ASM went beyond their resolution and sponsored an “accountability session,” inviting Chancellor John Wiley. Before Wiley entered, a student encouraged the audience to boo or cheer depending on his responses to five pre-determined “yes or no” questions. When pressed, Wiley said, “I am interested in doing things that will be effective,” implying the ineffectiveness of ASM’s approach. Wiley also, correctly, called their behavior, “childish.”

Time will tell whether this session of ASM eventually takes a similar approach regarding same-sex “marriage” or if they stop at their resolution. Hopefully, this column did not give them any ideas.

The complex issues of the Patriot Act and same-sex “marriage” certainly deserve thought and discussion on this campus, but not during ASM meetings, and certainly not in the overly simplistic “yes or no” terms that they persistently demand.

Mark A. Baumgardner ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in electrical engineering.