Few would argue or object to the notion that academic reputation should be the utmost concern and priority of any and all higher level educational institutions. Reputation affects nearly every facet of a school’s operation; from recruitment and enrollment of new students to attracting new programs and coverage, our esteem precedes us on so many levels. With stakes riding so high on this one very significant front, why do we have an organized effort on campus to detract from it?
The specific incident to which I refer is the action taken by the Young Conservatives of Texas group concerning the existence of Special Interest Seats within our student governing body. The issue, having last semester been addressed by both the Senate and a student vote, was quieted, only to return under these different auspices – a deeply regrettable turn of events. I say this because, though the YCT may have good intentions in principle, their petition could not have come at a more inappropriate time.
One major consequence of this petition is one that affects us all: again, the effect it has on our reputation as a first-class institution, and as a school open to all students of equal merit and accomplishment. According to the Princeton Review, a resource widely consulted by prospective students and parents alike, SMU ranks No. 9 in the category of “Little Race/Class Interaction” out of the hundreds of schools evaluated, and No. 20 in the “Alternative Lifestyles Not an Alternative” category, which pertains primarily to the sexual orientation demographic. In our civilized and equality-minded society, do these rankings stand out as appealing characteristics? I hope not. Given this disconcerting background information, a quick glance around campus should illustrate how dire our situation really is when it comes to diversity. If we ever intend to ascend the ranks of true prestige and be able to appeal to the best and the finest this country has to offer, we need to take steps to make our institution appear a friendlier, more colorful place than it is right now. Booting our Special Interest senators from their positions is, I assure you, not the proper means of doing so.
The action by the YCT is also one of extreme ill-timing. Given the recent, much underreported incidences of racially-motivated crimes on campus, the voice of ethnic minority students needs to be heard louder than ever, and the use for a senator to cater specifically to their needs is all the more necessary. For example, an African-American student recently suffered a broken hand in a racial incident, and though a police report was filed, the occurrence was met with a general response of disregard. If our programs for these circumstances have already fallen short of a level of effectiveness, how can we now justify rescinding their right to representation in Student Senate? The consequence of such action would surely equal further alienation of minority groups on campus, not to mention the fragmentation of our student body.
In lieu of pushing these groups further away from us, we should strive to make SMU a more harmonious, integrated community. Speaking from firsthand insight into the inner workings of our governing body, the system has worked beautifully up until now, and will certainly continue to do so, when given the support it has had in the past. Let’s let our Special Interest senators do their jobs, and move onto more pressing issues.
Robin Millican is a sophomore international studies and political science major. She may be contacted at [email protected].
