Whatever happened to Undergraduate Council reform? The council was on the right track last year with its increased funding of financially viable, popular campus organizations, block grants to House Committees, and establishment of a council Reform Committee. But since then, nothing much has happened.

Council members and other undergraduates on the Reform Committee poured many hours into debating and crafting 16 bills that would have altered the council. When the Committee's proposals were presented last spring, the council managed to pass only minor procedural-change measures. Major changes suggested by the Committee were either shelved or defeated because of a dearth of votes; fewer than 50 of the council's 88 members attended last year's closing meetings.

But the council is still broken and Reform Committee proposals are currently collecting dust. This is bad faith on the part of the council, which promised participants that the council would vote on their suggestions. The council ought once again to turn introspective in order to redeem itself. Taking a lead from the Reform Committee, we have some suggestions about where to start.

Cut the council in half. There is no need to have the current 90 council-member system. It is not uncommon to have candidates run in uncontested district races. Furthermore, there is no need to fill the council ranks with members who do not care about their constituents and skip important meetings, like those who considered council reform measures last year.

Simplify the recall process. Students ought to be able to fire delinquent council representatives more easily. Currently, impeachment is nearly impossible. One-third of a district must petition if it is dissatisfied with its representative. After that, turnout in the new election must exceed one-half of the district, and two-thirds of voters must wish to terminate that member's term. This is ridiculous. Make recall possible by decreasing the initial petition fraction and by decreasing the election turnout number to the percentage of the House which voted in the initial election.

Spin off the Campus Life Committee. The Reform Committee's proposal to allow this new committee to consist of both council members and other students is a good idea. Allowing more students to help organize campus-wide events like the Yale tailgate party and Springfest might help make those events more successful and lucrative. As a separate organization, the Campus Life Committee could have its own line on the term bill beneficially separating politics and social life on campus.

Elect a moderator. The council is notorious for being politicized and plagued by factions. The current system also puts the president in an awkward position by saddling her with the job of both champion of her own agenda and moderator of debate. The council should elect one of its members to serve as moderator of debate, a parliamentarian technocrat of sorts, and allow the president and vice-president to fully pursue the agendas that prompted students to support them in the first place.

Most importantly, students both on and off the council should take up the responsibility of making student voice well organized and well heard on campus. Council members should be well informed and attend meetings in order to represent their constituents' concerns. Students: make the effort to find out who your representatives are and communicate with them so that the council can be your voice as well.