Josh Akman is a bit behind the curve in this op-ed. He claims the SA is bordering on the brink of irrelevance with this new Constitution. Akman cites the new constitution that the SA is trying to pass a dangerous symptom that the SA is "spinning its wheels" towards irrelevance. But this begs the question, when has the SA not spun its wheels? Has the SA ever really been anything more than an ATM for student orgs and a place for future politicians to play dress-up? There should be only one time a year where the SA should be paid attention. The weeks that make up the allocations process at the beginning of the school year. After that, who cares? As someone who goes to the majority of SA meetings, the rest of them mainly consist of passing non-binding useless "resolutions", nominating people to fill constantly empty (mostly graduate school) seats and arguing over the bylaws. The bylaws that only affect the SA and have no bearing or consequence on any other student or group.

So Mr. Akman, I applaud that you are starting to see the light, but I think you didn't go far enough in your op-ed. The SA is irrelevant, they don't do a job that a bureaucrat couldn't do with almost twice the efficiency. I'm afraid that your column, though well written and well argued, will only be read by members of the SA who will no doubt pen a counter op-ed next week arguing for all the good the SA does, and of course to shill for this new undemocratic, useless Constitution they are trying to sneak past everyone. But in the end who cares? Well, there's you and me and (some) members of the Senate, Bindelglass and her goons...yep,that's about it. That's about 35 of us, and we are all pathetic for putting so much effort into something so inconsequential.