Potential Committee Responses to Referenda What we have been tasked with • A constitutionally binding question in response to the question: “Should the Honor Committee consider implementing a multi-sanction system?” • Gauging student opinions on potential changes Potential Constitutional Response • Placing direct question on the ballot “Should the Honor Committee consider implementing a multisanction system?” • Constitutionally binding the Committee to further consideration with no change this year “Every third year, the Honor Committee shall gauge student opinion on its sanctioning policies.” • Constitutional change that gives Committee the power to make future change “The Honor Committee shall have the power to: Exclude permanently from student status or impose lesser sanctions to University students found to have committed Honor violations” Gauging Student Opinion on Options • Ways to gauge student opinion – Ballot – Student Body Wide Survey Why the ballot isn’t our best option: Wording: Should a majority of voting students vote affirmatively on a non-binding question of opinion pertaining to the Honor System in a University-wide election, the Honor Committee shall, in the following year, put such question before the student body as a binding constitutional amendment. Problems: 1. Vote affirmatively is meant for yes/no questions – our options would not be yes/no. 2. Depending on how we define affirmatively, we’re stuck in the same place, implementing a sanctioning system in our constitution, not our by-laws where it belongs. What we can do • Put on a constitutionally binding question regarding the Powers section or institutionalization of this conversation in the Constitution • Send out a student body wide survey gauging opinion on the options we’ve proposed. Collect demographic information so we also know who is responding/not responding to our survey. If the Constitutional Amendment passes, set forth a timeline for further consideration. • Modify Section 2 of the Self-Governance Section of the constitution so that in the future, the Committee can ask question via the ballot and respond to them in the appropriate places New Language for Section 2. • Should a majority of voting students vote affirmatively on a non-binding question of opinion pertaining to the Honor System in a University-wide election, the Honor Committee shall, in the following year, put such question before the student body as a binding constitutional amendment. • Should a majority of voting students vote affirmatively on a non-binding question of opinion pertaining to the Honor System in a University-wide election, the Honor Committee shall enact a response within the time frame of one year.