Editorial, Issue 7 — Volume CVIII

Good Enough for Government Work

The expression “good enough for government work” rings true in virtually every facet of Student Government. Because of the lack of incentives in place to score a committee grade above a Satisfactory and to improve the experiences of high school students (regardless of one’s SG position), Student Government cannot thrive unless through radical reform (which is unlikely to occur because, again, no incentives exist for it).

Model Home is sufficient evidence of this. Last semester, its heads failed to fulfill their bylaws, and the following question emerged: how do we improve this clearly porous system?

Over the years, the committee system has evolved. Improving the lounging area of the Student Body or electing ten heads to plan homecoming might once have been necessary, but it is not anymore.  Now, the point of these committees isn’t to meet with the Dean of Student Life about chairs or eating areas. On a larger scale, the point of these committees is to actively engage students otherwise uninterested in Student Government.

Between an abundance of leadership opportunities and the noxious Parker social environment, the committee system has strayed drastically from this path. The result is a broken committee system in which students run with their friends to prove their social superiority rather than passion for the position.

In the past, far too many DCAs have promised to “revitalize” the committee system as if the system has ever had life in the first place. While the promise of revitalization is already overachieving and vague, no significant change has come. DCAs consistently renege on their campaign promises. Perhaps, they are being too quixotic as candidates, expecting reform to a system the student body does not seem to want to change. Committees fail every year to meet their baseline requirements and to genuinely care about their position as Heads.

One solution is appointing DCA representatives who, between themselves, attend every committee event and grade it. Only committee events deemed “good” should count toward a committee’s total number of events. This representative system would ensure that each committee isn’t just throwing together pointless events.

As Model Home Heads, you only need to rearrange couches or host an event to meet the bare minimum required of you. But if this is all you are doing, why did you run to become heads in the first place? When so many students continue to underachieve as committee heads and scrape by without impeachment, what motivation is there for students who genuinely hope to participate in Student Government or committees?

Many students run for committee heads to take an insufficient position onto an otherwise blank college application. And though this may be a tough pill to swallow, colleges do not care if an applicant was a Model Home Head or Music Committee Head. Leadership positions elected by a student body hold far less leverage than one achieved through ability and academic prowess. Why do students with no ideas, motivation, or dedication to a particular committee decide to run? More importantly, why do we vote for candidates whose decision to run is based on social currency instead of an actual desire to improve the high school experiences of the student body.

Though Model Home and Film Committee have fewer requirements than Curriculum and Social Committee, both are not living up to their potential. What we need is radical reform and to elect candidates who clearly value helping the student body and who don’t follow the expression “good enough for government work.”