Playing Hookeys

The Student Council is tinkering with its elections system again. In the past there has been complaints that cliques of undergraduates have been taking advantage of the present system to boost into a Council position some friends of theirs who was completely unknown to the rest of the College into a Council position. Often a man could win with votes from only one House. This saddled the Council with candidates of cliques, and students more acceptable to the wider undergraduate body lost out.

Under the new proposal, students will have as many first-place, votes as there are positions open. The plan comes to the Council with a successful record in state elections, and with the blessings of men who are experts in the business of insuring fair representation. It seems like a sound plan, and might well be extended to Class Committee and other important elections, as well as the Council.

But while the Council decides on how to get the best people elected, it should also give some thought to getting rid of members who, once elected play hookey. There are three or four such perpetual truants whose absence has, twice in the last month, kept the Council from voting on important business.

Presently, a member is out if he misses three meetings. This is too many. Membership on the Council is not so burdensome a job that a member should not attend every meeting. That is what he was elected for. Once avoidable absence should be grounds for dismissal. This will keep members true to the promises they make in then maiden speeches about faithful participation in Council affairs. And it will eliminate the kind of meetings where, because of lack of a quorum, Council members can do little but sit in P.B.H. and balance their teacups and cookies.