A committee of the Senate is not the Senate

The 78th Session senators have now had a few weeks' taste of summer, which means it's time for the Senate to recess until August and leave those poor souls who are in Reno (and who volunteer) to handle the Senate's business.

What usually occurs (at least in every interim period since 2007) is the Senate establishes an interim committee that has the authority to consider legislation within the jurisdiction of the standing committees and report it to the Senate by the time the Senate reconvenes from its break. Below is the model resolution establishing an interim committee (S. Res. 75-29).

Associated Students Statutes at Large Volume 75--Unofficial

When the Senate adopts rules of the Senate at the beginning of a session in the model fashion, readopting this type of resolution is unnecessary (sort of discussed here and here). Anyway, that's sort of off topic.

Enter Sen. Jesus Palma, who has introduced S. Res. 78-25 (thanks for numbering legislation!), scheduled to be considered at today's Senate meeting. The resolution would create an interim committee that is "entrusted with the full power and duties of the Senate," including the authority to pass legislation. That legislation would automatically sunset when the Senate reconvenes following a recess. The resolution is creative, no doubt about that, but it is fatally unconstitutional. Before I get to the constitutional concerns, a couple nitpicky points.

• The legislation says the committee (called the "Summer Session" in the legislation, but let's call a spade a spade) is to have a number of members "not to equal or exceed a majority of the full Senate; but must consist of at least twelve Senators." With a 22-member Senate, a majority is 12. The reason staying below a majority is critical is because generally under the Open Meeting Law, whenever a quorum (defined as majority) of a public body meets, it must be noticed and conducted under the OML.
• Ignoring that this committee would have power to pass legislation, it's exceedingly rare for the presiding officer of the parent body to also chair a committee (a continuing problem for the Oversight Committee) because a presiding officer should maintain the appearance of impartiality; the chair of a committee must advocate for the committee's positions, creating an inherent conflict.

Constitutionally, this "Summer Session" idea is dead on arrival. The ASUN Constitution is explicit about the enactment of legislation. In order for a bill to become law, it must first have "passed the Senate." ASUN Const. art. II, sec. 4(a). While the Senate may have all the legislative power of the Association, ASUN Const. art. II, sec. 1, and have the power to make all laws necessary for ASUN, ASUN Const. art. II, sec. 3(a), that doesn't mean it has the power to rewrite by rule the constitutional process for enacting laws. Sen. Palma's proposed committee would do just that.

The proposed committee also deprives the students of their representation because the full Senate is not considering the legislation before it goes to the President for him to sign or veto. Those senators who are not on the committee will have no vote, and thus the students who those senators represent will be unrepresented.

The proposal also leaves some questions unanswered. Does legislation the committee "passes" have to be presented to the President for approval? If so, what if the President vetoes a bill? Does it go to the committee for an override? What about the constitutional provisions governing veto overrides by the Senate, ASUN Const. art. II, sec. 4(b)-(e)? Does this committee obliterate the President's power to make recess appointments, ASUN Const. art. III, sec. 2(c)? If the committee truly has the "full power" of the Senate, can it expel senators from the Senate under article II, section 2(c) of the ASUN Constitution? And the list goes on. This alone should be sufficient evidence that this "committee with full power" proposal is a bad idea.

Finally, the Senate cannot delegate to a committee the constitutional powers that are explicitly vested in the body as a whole (e.g., enacting legislation, confirming executive appointments, proposing constitutional amendments). To do so would circumvent the exclusive processes laid out in the constitution.

This proposal reminds me of a couple of proposals that were considered during the 74th Senate Session (selected documents here). Assuming this proposal is based on one of those, a critical point that Sen. Palma seems to be unaware is that the previous ASUN constitution did not explicitly dictate how legislation became law; the present one does. That single difference precludes this proposal.

Rarely does the Senate need to take immediate action during the summer. If the need does exist, however, convening a special meeting with distant senators teleconferencing or video-conferencing should not be much of an impediment to achieving quorum.

In short, the model interim committee established during the 75th Session should be adequate, and it carries with it none of the constitutional concerns as does this proposal, since it is a committee of the Senate just like any other. Sen. Palma's proposal is certainly creative, but the constitutional concerns make it unworkable.

Budgets and appropriations

One of the more nuanced items in ASUN is the difference between a budget and appropriations. The ASUN Constitution states that the Senate has the power "[t]o set a budget for the ASUN, but no money shall be spent from the treasury without appropriations made by law." ASUN Const. art. II, sec. 3(a)(2). This clause clearly indicates there is a difference between a "budget" and "appropriations made by law."

It may help to have some definitions. Black's Law Dictionary defines budget as "[a] statement of an organization's estimated revenues and expenses for a specified period, usu. a year." An appropriation is defined as "[a] legislative body's act of setting aside a sum of money for a public purpose." An appropriations bill is "[a] bill that authorizes governmental expenditures." And a budget bill is "[a] bill designating how money will be allocated for the following fiscal year."

Applying these definitions to ASUN, in its simplest form, a budget bill is one that sets an estimate of the amount of money coming into ASUN (revenues) and the amount going out (expenditures). A budget does nothing more than that. It does not authorize spending. That is what an appropriations bill (or several) is for. This distinction is important because the fiscal year 2009 budget was invalidated in Judicial Council Case No. AN-006 in part because proper appropriations were never made. That brings us to tonight.

The Senate is going to take up a bill setting the budget, which reads as follows:

Be it enacted by the Senate of the Associated students,[*]
That the budget of the Associated Students for Fiscal Year 2011 is hereby made effective as set out in Schedule A of this law.

[*] Could someone seriously fix the bill template to capitalize "students," as it is supposed to be?

So if this is all the Senate passes, ASUN cannot legally spend any money in the next fiscal year because no appropriations have been made by law. So what does a proper appropriation look like? I'll give a current example. Below is a properly drafted appropriations bill using figures in the proposed budget for next fiscal year.

Be it enacted by the Senate of the Associated Students, That the following sums are appropriated, out of any money in the Treasury not otherwise appropriated, for the Senate for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2011, namely:

SENATE

Compensation, Officers and Employees

For compensation of officers, employees, and others as authorized by law, $72,573.70, which shall be paid from this appropriation without regard to the following limitations:

office of the secretary

For the Office of the Secretary, $15,810.00.

fringe benefits

For fringe benefits expenses, $2,155.70.

Expenses of the Senate

For expenses of the Senate and its officers and employees, $6,000.00.

Travel

For travel expenses as authorized by Senate resolution or law, $6,000.00.

Hosting

For hosting expenses, $1,500.00, of which $500.00 is for summer training and $1,000.00 is for the outreach efforts of the Senate.

This Act may be cited as the "Senate Appropriations Act, 2011".

That is a proper appropriations bill for just the Senate. Repeat for each department, office, account, or other unit of ASUN. The appropriations process is one way by which the Senate can exert control over the executive on how to spend money.

If the reader needs more evidence that this is the proper appropriations process, look up appropriations bills from the 75th Senate Session here. One note, ASUN Public Law 75-2 is a special case because the budget and spending authorizations for that fiscal year were adopted under the previous constitution. That law was intended simply to make effective under the new constitution the prior authorizations. It was not meant as a model of a proper appropriations act for subsequent fiscal years.

N.B.: Changes to appropriations were not made by striking dollar amounts in the budget and inserting new ones (as has become the practice since the 75th Session), but were made by enacting new appropriations bills. See, e.g., ASUN Public Laws 75-23, 75-24, and 75-30. For an example of a rescission, see ASUN Public Law 75-31. For an example of capital spending, see ASUN Public Law 75-43. (I'd link to the individual files on the ASUN website, but they've been needlessly scrubbed.)

[Bottoset] sucks. Hard.

I thought long and hard about writing (and posting) this entry. The (non)story doesn't deserve the attention. Neither do the people who are responsible. But to let it go without response would be even worse than staying silent.

The Sagebrush, which seems to have taken an interest to ASUN again (maybe they just didn't like those in the 77th Session), reported today that a couple of genius senators have introduced a bill to abolish ASUN. Okay, that's really being overly generous, because the bill does no such thing. The operative part of the bill:

Therefore, be it enacted by the Senate of the Associated students, that ASUN and all it encompasses be abolished immediately, and that fees stop being collected from the student body.

The evidence for this proposed enactment?

a. ASUN represents a small minority on this campus, as evidenced by a 10% voter turnout during elections.

b. Compulsory fees are unethical, and create pay for a handful of bureaucrats while wasting student money on pizza and frivolous expenditures.

c. ASUN has abused its authority, and must be stopped.

d. ASUN sucks. Hard.

This bill, just like the petition UNR SFL has been circulating, is destined for failure. Epic failure.

First, the Senate cannot abolish itself, much less the rest of ASUN. It doesn't have that power. Even the voters in ASUN do not have the power to force the issue. The only entity with the legal authority to abolish ASUN is the Board of Regents.

Second, as most (except the bill's sponsors) readily acknowledge, it's a joke. Third, the sponsors clearly haven't thought the bill through. What happens if it passes? Seriously. This more than anything else I'd like a response to.

One last little question. Doesn't supporting this bill, and especially voting for it, either explicitly or implicitly constitute a violation of the oath ASUN officers take to support the ASUN Constitution? Why is that not grounds for expulsion from the Senate? If being clearly subversive to the body you are bound to support doesn't qualify as an offense sufficient to expulsion, I don't know what does.

I hope a senator gets wise and objects to this bill's consideration or moves to indefinitely postpone this joke of a bill. To do otherwise invites ridicule.

---

Update: May 5 at 9:20 p.m.
Turns out the bill is heading to Sen. Bottoset's committee, Government Operations, for a hearing. This will certainly be interesting to watch unfold.

Inheriting a mess

Newly elected Senate Speaker Brandon Bishop, along with 21 other senators who began their one-year terms of office Wednesday night, have inherited a mess, mostly not of their doing. It's a terrible situation to be in. You're new, you're excited, you don't really know what's going on, though some of the cockier senators may think they do (I'm looking at you, incumbents), and that's difficult enough, but now the Judicial Council has just pissed on your joyous day by erasing much of what a Senate did two sessions ago and created precedents that could spell doom for much of the previous session as well. Sucks, don't it?

How Bishop immediately leads the Senate through these murky times will speak volumes about his potential as Speaker. Humbly, I submit three things he should do immediately, so as to not create further damage.

First, get your bearings. You need to figure out what the Council said and how it applies to the here and now. Just because the acts invalidated happened ages ago (not even 2 years ago, to those of us existing in the real world) doesn't mean it won't have repercussions on what happens on today and tomorrow. For instance, the fact the Open Meeting Law was violated and bills were not properly enacted isn't the only reason the FY2009 spending was invalidated. It's also because enacting a budget doesn't satisfy the appropriations clause of the ASUN Constitution. (Senators who just read that and are lost, welcome to the real world.)

Second, make damn sure you don't make new mistakes, especially on the same grounds as the old ones. This should be pretty obvious, but sometimes student leaders can be particularly thick-skulled. Bishop seems pretty level-headed, so hopefully he won't disappoint. Indeed, he already seems to be off to a much more competent start than his predecessor given his first agenda. Each session does not exist in a vacuum. Institutions like the Senate must be cognizant of what happened in the past because often it has an effect on what can be done in the present.

The Open Meeting Law is the most immediate thing Bishop needs to become proficient in. As short as the law may be, it covers a lot and has a lot of nuance to it. Seek out competent help, and I can tell you right now, it doesn't exist among the ASUN student development personnel. You can decide to go it alone, but I hope you can see how well that worked out for Speakers Priscilla Acosta and Gracie Geremia. That's not to say the advisors are completely worthless, but learn their weaknesses.

Third, once you have your bearings and have ensured you won't make the same mistakes twice, or new ones for that matter, it's time to start cleaning up the mess. That's going to be considerably more complicated than it may appear now. It will take time. It will take patience. It will take assistance from others. Don't rush this step, because doing so will increase the likelihood of mistakes.

Oh, I almost forgot: while all this is happening, you've got until June 30 to enact a lawful budget and make appropriations for ASUN for the next fiscal year. Don't get too excited now.

Finally, be aware that although the Judicial Council may have ruled, this story ain't over yet. Others will be gunning to point fingers and assign blame to someone. It will go beyond the confines of the ASUN sandbox. Just be aware. Others still might decide to have some fun at ASUN's expense and start picking away at the 77th Session's acts, now that the heavy lifting of establishing some precedents is done. All I can say is learn, and learn quickly.

It may seem the whole world is instantly against you, but it just seems that way. Seek outside advice. You may find your biggest assets are not in the ASUN bubble. This is somewhat self-serving, but seeking help from exceptional former senators might be a good idea.  Some are willing to help, they just need to be asked.

Congratulations to the President and Vice President elect and the Members of the 78th ASUN Senate

As promised, some brief analysis.

• Jose won by an 8-point margin
• Sadykova won by a 14-point margin
• All 5 incumbent senators won reelection. The only ASUN insider to lose was Shirley Diaz, although it was inevitable for an insider to lose in that race.
• 14 men and 8 women were elected to the Senate
• About 12 percent of the undergraduate student body voted, about the same as in the past few years
• Both advisory funding questions passed by more than 60 percent of the vote
• The closest race, in the School of Journalism, was decided by three votes

Once we have the numbers, we will compare voter turnout rates by college.

The most surprising result from this election was student support for increased fees. By significant margins, both questions passed. It is evidence that even in times of increased tuition and fees, students are willing to pay additional fees for specific programs and services.

Also of note is how smoothly this election was conducted. Major kudos to Commission Chair Jeremiah Todd and his entire crew. Their hard work is apparent and they deserve our praise. Great job, guys!

2010 ASUN General Election Uncertified Results

Winners in bold; NOTA stands for none of the above. Some analysis later.

President of the Associated Students
Charlie Jose-850
Casey Stiteler-713

Vice President of the Associated Students
Shirley Diaz-657
Leissan Sadykova-855

Senator for the College of Agriculture, Biotechnology, and Natural Resources (2 seats)
Jeffrey Fine-49
Corey Jokerst-78
Randy Pares-38
Chelsea Truax-61
NOTA-0

Senator for the College of Business Administration (3 Seats)
Jake Butera-151
Richard Corn-117
Jacob Crawley-91
Mathew Neben (Incumbent)-157
NOTA-20

Senator for the College of Education (2 seats)
Ashlee Benton-35
Jourdan Douglas-17
Edna Meza-43
David Ronan-48

Senator for the College of Engineering (2 Seats)
Alexandria Hill-70
Adam Khan-70
Roger Przybyla-53
NOTA-16

Senator for the College of Liberal Arts (8 Seats)
Joseph Barrett-124
Brandon Bishop (Incumbent)-231
Mitch Bottoset (Incumbent)-162
Samuel Crampton-144
Christopher Day-164
Branden Jung-167
Tatiana Kosyrkina-113
Lea Moser (Incumbent)-187
Ann Newsome (Incumbent)-164
Joey Nizuk-123
Jesus Palma-242
Jordan Weaver-119
NOTA-58

Senator for the College of Science (2 Seats)
Joseph Agor-38
Angel Arias-33
Jennifer Masters-54
Natasha Monga-87
Lauren Riley-74
NOTA-0

Senator for the Division of Health Sciences (2 Seats)
John Haller-51
Reynaldo Veloz-67
Kim Williams-70

Senator for the School of Journalism
Jonathan Moore-61
Misha Ray-59

Ballot Question 1- JV $5 Art Fee
Yes-865
No-506

Ballot Question 2- JV $25 Student Support Services Fee
Yes-855
No-534

Fewer candidates file for election

Fewer students filed for ASUN elections this year than last, according to government records. As of the filing deadline Friday, 48 students filed for executive and legislative races, with 3 each in the presidential and vice presidential races, prompting a primary election on March 3-4.

Last year, 54 students filed in the executive and Senate races, 2 each for president and vice president and 50 for the Senate. In 2008, 41 students filed for office.

Of the 48 who filed, 3 have not yet qualified to run, all in the Senate, according to official listings. To qualify for election to the Senate, a candidate must have a 2.75 GPA, be enrolled in at least 7 undergraduate credits, be a member of the college in which the candidate is running, and pay a $50 filing fee.

Five incumbents are running for reelection in the Senate. Mathew Neben, in the College of Business, and Brandon Bishop, Mitch Bottoset, Lea Moser, and Ann Newsome, all in the College of Liberal Arts. Last year, 5 incumbents ran for reelection, all but one winning reelection.

Two candidates who ran for Senate but lost last year have filed again this year: Christopher Day and Tatiana Kosyrkina, both for the College of Liberal Arts.

In the presidential race, Casey Stiteler, who is the Director of Programming, will face off against Vice President Charlie Jose and Jacob Camp. Jose previously removed his name from candidacy but reapplied before the deadline.

In the vice presidential race, Sen. Shirley Diaz (Liberal Arts) will face Leissan Sadykova, a club commissioner, and Ryan Childers. Sadykova ran for Senate last year and lost.

The general election is March 10-11. All officers are elected to single year terms beginning on April 14.

Last week to file, most races empty or uncontested

As of 3 p.m. today, only one college will have a competetive Senate race in the upcoming ASUN Election on March 10-11. The Reynolds School of Journalism, which is entitled to one seat, has two candidates filing for candidacy. Info on who has filed is available here.

Worse, three colleges--Business (three seats), Education (two), and Science (two)--have no candidates filed at all. That's seven seats--or about one-third of the Senate--that will sit vacant come April, unless more candidates file by the deadline, Friday at 5 p.m. If that vacancy rate remains, the Senate must hold special elections to fill those vacancies.

There will be a primary for the presidency, as three candidates have filed. It remains to be seen if the decline in candidates is due to the $50 filing fee implemented last year or if it is because marketing efforts are failing. Last year 50 candidates ran for the 22-member Senate. So far, only 14 candidates have filed this year.

Sad.