UC Votes Down Legislation Reps. Contend Would Decrease Transparency

The Undergraduate Council narrowly failed to pass a bylaws change at its Monday meeting that would have increased the required threshold needed to motion for a roll-call vote from one-fourth to two-thirds of the Council, a change which many representatives contended would have decreased the body’s transparency.

Since the legislation would have altered the Council’s bylaws, it required a two-thirds majority to pass. The legislation failed on Monday as 25 representatives voted in favor and 14 voted against it, though representatives have a week to change their votes, meaning the legislation could pass if at least one Council member switches their opposing vote to one of support.

A roll-call vote entails that each UC representative must state out loud whether they support or oppose a piece of legislation, with their individual votes recorded on the publicly accessible UC website.

“A roll-call vote allows all of us to be held accountable — that is, responsible — for the people that voted to elect us,” Ivy Yard Representative Grey Johnson ’22 said.

UC Treasurer Nadine M. Khoury ’20, who ultimately voted in favor of Monday’s legislation, noted that the anonymous voting system itself was rare in legislative bodies, such as the U.S. Senate.

“Why should we be eliminating roll-call votes if, in reality, the Senate and other comparable institutions where they vote, the votes are not anonymous?” she said. “If we do think we are a representative body, shouldn’t we be held accountable for what we’re voting for?”

Proponents of the legislation argued it would increase the efficiency of the Council and prevent some representatives from intimidating others to vote one way or the other.

“The reason that the Senate does, and we don’t is, because the Senate is the Senate and we’re college students, and I don’t want to be held accountable 20 years from now for something I voted for right now,” Mather House Representative Conner P. Williams ’21 said.

Oak Yard Representative A. Blake Barclay ’22 said anonymous votes allow representatives to vote how they feel, as opposed to what is “socially acceptable.”

“We’re not representing a very diverse ideological perspective,” Barclay said. “I think we’re representing a college campus that definitely leans heavily one direction.”

“It’s not about accountability,” Barclay added. “Sometimes in these cases I literally feel it’s about safety from harassment on this campus.”

Certain types of legislation — including constitutional amendments and changes to bylaws — will still require a roll-call vote, as mandated by the constitution.

The vote to increase the threshold to motion for a roll-call vote comes just months after the UC adopted an anonymous voting system for most pieces of legislation, replacing hand and voice votes, which theoretically gave outside observers — including reporters — the ability to identify how each representative voted.

At the time, some UC members said they supported the change to anonymous voting because it allowed representatives in the minority to feel comfortable voting their consciences.

The UC also voted on Monday to allocate $3,000 to help fund a concentration declaration event for sophomores in early November. The Harvard Alumni Association, and the College’s Advising Programs Office and Dean of Students Office, have also tentatively agreed to fund the event, which will feature food, drinks, a photo booth, and music.

The legislation will help the Council at least partly address a referendum question the student body passed last November requesting more funding for class-wide programming events for sophomores and juniors.

Last year, no class-wide declaration event was held due to “logistical issues,” said Lowell House Representative Jungyeon Park ’20, who sponsored the legislation. Park noted that although most individual Houses held events for their residents, she said the experience left much to be desired.

— Staff writer Jonah S. Berger can be reached at jonah.berger@thecrimson.com. Follow him on Twitter @jonahberger98.