Letter to the Editor

I see that once again I have been personally attacked in the pages of The Preface in spite of a promise from its editor that assured me that The Preface was not interested in getting in a feud with anyone. So once again I am forced to write and correct the record.

The SGA Constitution states that the Chief Justice shall not serve as a paid employee of The Preface. It also states that the Chief Justice shall interpret and provide guidance as to the spirit of the Student Government Association Constitution.

There are many reasons for these clauses; among them is the fact that since the SGA and The Preface both pay a stipend, the SGA does not want students to be in a position to double dip. The SGA does not believe that it is wise that an oligarchy of student(s) have a position of control of the SGA and influence in the official student newspaper that may be tasked with reporting on the SGA. The SGA also values the independence of the official student newspaper from the SGA.

As Chief Justice of the SGA, I must uphold the spirit of the SGA Constitution and be beyond reproach. A staple columnist for The Preface is a paid position. The fact that I refused to take money from the Preface because I refused to fill out the privacy forms does not change the fact that the position itself is a paid one and is therefore prohibited.

Imagine this scenario if you will, if I was an independently wealthy student and I refused to take a stipend, I could be both the President of the SGA and the Editor of The Preface and stock both with as many of my people as I could. This is what is meant by violating the spirit of the constitution and is exactly an example of what the SGA wishes to avoid.

I would also like to point out that the letter featured in The Preface mischaracterized what former SGA President Michael Renfrow said. Renfrow was not only most dismayed to find out that a part of a casual conversation ended up in The Preface; what Renfrow really said is that nothing in the SGA Constitution would prohibit an SGA member from penning the occasional guest column or op-ed piece. This hardly describes my former position at The Preface.

I would also like to point out that as head of the SGA Judicial Council; it is my responsibility to interpret the SGA Constitution both to its letter and its spirit. The Judicial Council holds sole power of interpretation in these matters.

I am most curious to see what libel may await me in next week’s issue of The Preface.

Chuck Norton