On Saturday, April 26, photographs of next year’s Student Government Association Executive Board and some senators were e-mailed to several Saint Louis University officials and The University News. The photos show SGA members drinking alcohol at a “Voice for Progress” celebration party on Friday, April 25, and some of these individuals were minors.
The fact that Executive Board members and future senators were drinking while underage is disappointing, but not unexpected. According to a 2005 study conducted by the federal government’s Department of Health and Human Safety, 57.8 percent of underage U.S. college students drink alcohol each month. It might not be right, and it might not be legal, but underage drinking happens, both at SLU and across the country.
Samantha Howard, Alex Joyce, Jonathan Perdue, Samantha Morr and Michael Harriss-the nearly unrivaled “Voice for Progress” ticket-used the remaining $300 of their campaign funds, along with $200 out of Joyce’s pocket, to fund the party, and the entire ticket was invited.
By Howard’s account, a couple hundred students attended the Coronado bash, decked out in the ticket’s signature red color.
Next year’s SGA Executive Board has exemplified appalingly poor judgment, even if the underage drinking is excused. They were photographed drinking, then they allowed these photos to be posted on Facebook, with themselves identified in the photos. This indicates that they either didn’t worry about the consequences, or that they didn’t think they would get caught.
Though Joyce said that parties are typical after a successful campaign, the ticket’s money should have been used for a more reputable cause. Why not donate the leftover money to Relay for Life? Victory parties are a normal part of political life, but an inexpensive party and a donation would have made a much better impression.
How many times have these same senators stressed that Chartered Student Organizations cannot use SGA funds to buy alcohol? How many times have they seen students, their constituents, punished for underage drinking?
Since students had limited options when voting for next year’s Executive Board, members of SGA must work that much harder to win over their constituents. It is difficult to place trust in representatives who begin their tenure with such inappropriate decisions. The Executive Board assumed many risks by hosting a party with underage drinkers, and this debacle will be many administrators’ first impression of next year’s leaders.
Credibility will plummet, and the new Board will be forced to dig themselves out of a scandalous hole before it can even hope to push forward meaningful initiatives that can be taken seriously.
Underage drinking occurs in college; we concede this. Yet, if next year’s voices in SGA come from this kind of short-sighted decision-making, we question the type of progress this group has in mind.
