I, like many other students attended the public SGA meeting on Sunday to discuss the proposed changes to the SGA constitution.

First, let me start out by saying I do understand how organizations are run. I was the president of my fraternity until last November. During my time in office, I came to realize that the bylaws we operate under were not as productive or functional as they should or could have been. Much of this was due to the fact that, after 25 years of an organization running along, the working document becomes a hodgepodge of amendments and altercations that perhaps don't fit together as well as they could. And also perhaps because they don't reflect the current mood or direction of the organization.

This is all fine and well, but never at anytime during my thought process did I think, "Hm- time to throw these out the window and start from scratch."

SGA shouldn't be any different when it comes to their constitution. I went through our bylaws line by line with a large committee and talked about what worked and what didn't work, never did restructuring and reforming the organization that had been in place for a quarter of a century cross my mind or lips.

Now, while I don't know exactly how SGA works and I don't know how the powers that be came about the idea to change all of this, I do know one thing: The arrogance of this administration to come into office and wipe their noses with 20 years of precedent, is simply mind-boggling. This opinion of mine was solidified Sunday night when three (maybe four) past SGA presidents came back to express their strong discontent for this new constitution.

On that note, I was also appalled by the way the members of the body treated the guests, as well as former SGA president Emi Smith. It was shameful. This could be seen in the student body president's lack of interest in what she had to say, as well as in the speaker of the senate's seemingly complete incompetence when it came to doing his job effectively.

In case you haven't figured out the side I take on this issue, I will tell you. UD, as we all know, is a very unique place. We don't need an SGA constitution that is more in line with other documents from other schools around the country. We certainly don't need a document that Sarah Schoper thinks would be in our best interest. We also don't need to take Chris Schramm at her word for anything.

Nothing against Schoper or Schramm; they're both people I enjoy. But SGA isn't here to make the administration happy; they have every other office and department on campus to do that for them.

SGA is here to make the students happy and to communicate effectively with the administration. I haven't been involved in SGA during my time at the University of Dayton, but I have been involved in A LOT of other areas of student life, and let me tell you one thing based on that, the administration has no problem telling you what you want to hear. We're not fools; we must stop acting like it.

Edit this constitution with diligence and care, SGA. The meeting I witnessed Sunday was embarrassing. We need effective leaders in our body, not a new document. We need an improved document and leaders who are willing to defend that when the office of leadership and development comes knocking at the door.

If anything, hopefully this will encourage people to get out there and run for office this spring and fall ... it makes a difference.

Thanks and God bless.