Every Friday morning I attend my first-period history class, and then I drag my groggy, sleep-deprived body down three painful flights of stairs to the Auditorium for the weekly student government plenary. I have always loved Student Government at Parker. I like the fact that any student can walk up to the microphone and voice their opinion about something without any fear of judgment by the student body. When I sit in plenary each and every Friday morning, I enjoy an escape. An escape from the world of outside politics.

At school, my days are filled with politics. Politics are brought up in nearly every one of my classes on a daily basis. It’s inescapable. Politics, politics, politics. It’s not a bad thing; in fact, I love politics. But, in my opinion, too much of anything is a bad thing. Student Government is my one escape. Plenary is a place where I can exercise my right as a member of the student body to make a change in my community. Plenary is a place where I want the focus to be on Parker, and nowhere else but Parker.

Student Government seems to be synonymous with politics for many people—and to some extent it is. However, I believe that politics has its time and place, and Student Government is not the right setting for students to be influenced by the partisan headlines that have been increasingly more common in our beloved Student Voice. I think that by including politics in the Student Voice, the student body is more likely to become divided on a topic during plenary based on their political beliefs and not on what they believe is best for the school. 

In years past, the Student Voice has been centered around Parker and the opinions of its students. This year, I have noticed that the Student Voice has begun to stray further from its intended purpose which is clearly laid out in the constitution. According to Article III, Section 9, Clause A, Subclause ii of the Constitution, the Student Voice Editor must incorporate student opinion on the goings of Student Government, and allow students a forum for their announcements. There is no mention of the incorporation of outside news or politics, and I believe that they should be deliberately left out of the Student Voice altogether. 

I am not trying to convince people that Parker students should not be informed about what is going on in the political world. I do believe that all students should be politically engaged; however, plenary is not the place to do this. Plenary is a time where students should be focused on the presentation on stage, not what is going on in the news. Politics are covered in classes enough so that students at least have an idea of what is going on in the news, and students who wish to explore more can go out and do it on their own. 

In today’s world, all the news anyone could ever ask for is available on the internet. Students have access to a seemingly infinite amount of information on the internet, and there is no lack of political outlets available to be informed by. I don’t see why all of the political news that the student body receives should be dictated by one person. If politics are included in the Voice it needs to be done in a balanced, unbiased way, and that is hard for a single person to do.

If anything, writing about politics in the Student Voice will provide people who are interested in politics things they already know. The kids who don’t care about politics aren’t going to become informed from the headlines in the Voice because they aren’t going to read it in the first place. They are going to do the crossword puzzle and then stare at their phones until they are dismissed. 

The purpose of the Student Voice is to incorporate the opinions of the student body on the happenings of Student Government. I don’t see the effectiveness of the document. In plenary, I look around and I see a crowd of distracted faces. Student Government at Parker faces an even greater problem than the content of the Student Voice: participation. 

In plenary, there are more kids staring at their phones with their Airpods in than there are actually engaging in any form of debate. At times, side conversations spark up, and suddenly I have a hard time hearing what the presenter is saying on stage…with a microphone! Side conversations arise to such a great degree that the people on the stage have to stop what they are doing—wasting precious plenary time – in order to restore order in the crowd.

The omission of politics in the Voice could pose another issue: what is the alternative? A crossword puzzle? Sudoku? The content of the Student Voice poses a distraction to the student body. I often see people quietly conversing about the correct solutions to the Sudoku rather than paying attention to the people on stage. 

I am simply not sold on the inclusion of politics in the Student Voice. I don’t believe that it will stimulate any kind of increase in participation, nor will it create more politically aware students. The informed will become more informed, and the uninterested students – if they actually choose to read it – will be slightly more informed, yet with whatever the bias of the editor may be.

The Student Voice is an outdated document. Today, as everything is beginning to turn digital, I wonder why we continue to hand out hundreds of Student Voices every week, given that it is harmful to the environment to print so much paper.

Every Friday, the people on stage during plenary attempt to arouse some energy out of a crowd full of sleep-deprived, sometimes disinterested teenagers. Providing a document such as the Student Voice will only cause more distraction. Especially if controversial political topics are included. Students will be inclined to share their opinions on the headlines among themselves instead of contributing to any relevant discussion. 

As I ask myself about the inclusion of politics in the Student Voice, I have concluded that the document, in many cases, creates more problems than it solves. Maybe it’s time to question the existence of the Student Voice altogether.