Student senators seek support for discrimination bill

In the hope of cultural unity, Student Government develops legislation for inclusive campus

By: Amanda Grosgebauer

Posted: 2/20/08

A 10-day window was opened beginning 8:30 a.m., Feb. 8, to allow supporters of an anti-discrimination legislation in Student Senate to gather 4,700 signatures that would allow the legislation to be brought before the student body through a referendum. The window will close Friday morning.

Riley Bryan, a junior recreation, park and tourism sciences major and student senator for the College of Agriculture and Life Sciences, drafted the bill and introduced it to Senate in the fall.

After seeking legal advice from professionals and researching anti-discrimination policies from other institutions in the Big 12, Pac 10 and Top 20 universities, Bryan said he structured the bill to best fit within the spirit of unity important to Texas A&M University. The University has policies and programs in place to discourage discrimination.

"[The policies] are not inclusive to all people and are sending mixed and confusing signals to individuals about who is protected under them since the current policies are different and not in complete congruency," the bill states.

The bill further states, "creating a single, more inclusive statement would create congruency among all documents and send one message, that Texas A&M University will not tolerate discrimination in any form."

Bryan's bill lists every type of discrimination to be prohibited: race, ethnicity, creed, color, citizenship, national or ethnic origin, pregnancy, religion or lack thereof, sex, gender, sexual orientation, gender identity or expression, age, disability, genetic information, socioeconomic status, parental status, marital status and military or veteran status.

"Discrimination will happen no matter what, but an inclusive list would create a foundation for the University to support individuals when discriminated against," Bryan said.

He said that by listing the specifics, no one will fall through the cracks.

After its introduction in the fall, the Senate tabled the bill for three months to be edited to meet the approval of senators who voted against it.

Tyler Koch, senior speaker of the Senate, said during its time in the committee, representatives of groups that have historically been discriminated against were allowed to speak about the importance of the bill and why senators should support it.

Bryan was asked to bring dictionary, legal and social definitions of discrimination to share while changing wording in the bill, to hold less weight and responsibility, in order to meet the terms laid out by the senators opposed.

During the three-month period, many senators were e-mailed and asked to vote in favor of the bill. Few were asked by their constituents to vote against the bill. A division grew between senators in support of the bill and those who felt it was overloaded with verbiage and that a second, broader bill would be better, Koch said.

On Jan. 23, the bill was brought before the Senate for the final time. The vote ended with 17 in favor, 30 opposed and four abstained in an individual-voiced vote in which each senator had to declare their vote.

Former Student Senator Victor Guo, who represented The College of Geosciences, resigned from the Senate before the final vote in anticipation of its failure and said, "If this is something that Senate does not stand for, then it doesn't represent me."

Samantha Kropp resigned from her position for many reasons, "Most senators represent their own ideas or beliefs and don't go out and ask the opinion of the students in their caucus."

Kropp received e-mails from people in her college supporting the bill and voted in support of the bill because that is what her constituents asked her to do.

Bryan and supporters were unwilling to let the fight end with a failed bill, so for the first time in student government history, they enacted a clause that allows for a referendum vote to be opened to the students if 10 percent of the student body signs a petition within 10 days.

Supporters have been petitioning through Facebook groups and events, tabling every day in Rudder Plaza and visiting organizations to try to gain enough signatures before time runs out.

Meanwhile, senators opposed to Bryan's original bill have drafted a second, broader anti-discrimination bill, authored by Landon Proctor, a senator for veterinary medicine.

"Senator Bryan's bill was a great idea, but the Senate does not vote on ideas. The Senate votes on words. The words have to be right in order for us to pass a piece of legislation," Proctor said.

"It was the mistake on everyone within the committee that we did not enforce changes on the bill," Proctor said. "We should have figured out a way to agree with one another." He said that the bill was voted on too early.

"People have this mentality that the bill I authored is against Senator Bryan's bill, but that is simply not true. My bill was created to assist in his efforts should his bill fail," Proctor said. "Something needed to be done about the discrimination policies at A&M and we intend to work on it. My bill is a foundation bill."

Proctor said that a broad bill would allow independent amendments to be attached to suit specific needs when they arise.

Bryan said the problem with Proctor's bill is that while it lists some forms of discrimination, it does not list all and creates space to decide what is and what is not applicable to be considered discrimination.

When asked if he will push for amendments, Bryan said he would, though he is unsure if it would do any good for getting senators to vote outside of their personal beliefs.

Proctor's bill will come up for vote Wednesday.

Koch said that whether in favor of or against, petitioning will strengthen communication between Student Senate and the student body. He and Student Body President Conner Prochaska promised that the issue of anti-discrimination would not be forgotten, but will be moved to the forefront of Student Government Association.

"The principles behind this bill represent the core values of our Aggie Family," Prochaska said in an e-mail to the senate. "Verbiage or terminology is not an excuse to disregard principles of acceptance and respect."

When asked if he would settle for the second bill, Prochaska said it may not be the best legislation in comparison to the first, but he cannot see it as settling, for any step forward is a step in the right direction.

Bryan agreed but said he hopes that the first bill will continue to press on. "Whether it passes or not, we are educating the student body."

It is important for everyone to be aware that students are looking to address the issues of discrimination, Bryan said. He concluded his anti-discrimination bill with the statement, "Texas A&M University is an institution that prides itself in being on the forefront of leadership and a place that fosters an environment for an all inclusive Aggie Family where 'We are the Aggies, the Aggies are We' means something."