ASUCD Senate History

Winter 2013 - Fall 2013

Power Structure Disclaimer: This was written by Maxwell Kappes. He takes pride in being a special snowflake with his votes and is known in senate for either being a joke or hating everyone depending on how the person feels about him at any given point. As such this may or may not be an ego stroke for him more than a quality power structure. But then again, do you see any other political scientists in senate?

There are currently three slates at the senate table: NOW, BEST, and SMART. There are also two independents. NOW has 5 seats, BEST has 1, and SMART has 4. Unlike the Fall 2012 senators, who are more "ideologically pure" to their respective slates, the new senators are not so. NOW suffered in the Fall election, only gaining 2 seats. In the election, by not forcing their ideology as much they managed to win a third seat. SMART as well only elected one pure SMART senator. This means that while there are more senators aligned with parties in this table than the last there are many who seem to not feel story ties to their parties or ideology.

The Fall senators have sat through 21 contentious votes. Some votes are dividing the house, some are for pro-temp, some are for vetoes, and some are on bills. 10 with the Winter 2012 senators and 11 with the Winter 2013 senators. At the first table much of the disagreement as on party lines, making it difficult to vote against both parties simultaneously. On the second table less votes have been forced by parties than by senators Maxwell Kappes and Miles Thomas, making many of the votes more-or-less bipartisan. Because of this the Winter senators aggregate votes are generally more in line with the bipartisanship than the Fall senators.

And then there is this handy graph. The percentages indicate now often each senator votes with each party. 3 NOW senators are highly partisan, voting with their party at least 90% of the time (Felicia Ong (35,96), Tal Topf (43,96), and Ryan Wonders (55,100)). Likewise, all SMART senators vote with their party at least 90% of the time(Armando Figueroa (91,26), Alyson Noele Sagala (96,35), Reuben Torres (91,64), and Yee Xiong (91,45)). This creates a fast 3-4 split in the senate in favor of SMART. From there Pamela Nonga (82,55) lies closer to the SMART party center (92,43) and Amrit Kaur Sahota (64,73) lies closer to the NOW party center (56, 84), meaning both parties can sway their senators to their side. This creates the 4-5 split. From there Liam Burke (74,65) lies closest to the table center (68,56) and is not particularly close to either side, making him a swing vote. On the other side Maxwell Kappes (43,9) is more of a contrarian who votes with SMART more than NOW but can not be relied upon. Miles Thomas (45,9) is similarly contrarian but is also a former member of SMART and has consistently voted with them on NOW v SMART votes, allowing SMART to count on him in deciding votes. This brings the table to a 4-6 split in favor of SMART with Kappes and Burke running the center on partisan votes.

Fall 2012 - Winter 2013

Surface Power Structure

The power make-up of this ASUCD Senate was divided between numerous factions after the dissolution of BOLD. 3 seats were held by independents elected in the Winter 2012 election: Bradley Bottoms, Joyce Han, and Don Gilbert. These three senators often formed a bloc with the two members of the NOW Slate, Tal Topf and Felicia Ong, both elected in the Fall 2012 election. The SMART slate had three senators: Beatriz Anguiano, who was elected in the winter of 2012, and Alyson Noele Sagala and Armando Figueroa who were both elected in the Fall 2012 election. Senators Paul Min and Kabir Kapur, both independents elected in the Winter 2012 election, have maintained a large degree of independence, along with fellow independent Maxwell Kappes, who was elected in the Fall 2012 election; however, these independents and SMART often formed a separate bloc. Senator Liam Burke was elected in Fall 2012 as an independent and had the honor of running the gauntlet between the larger factions.

Any piece of legislation requesting a financial allocation that comes before the ASUCD Senate must have a two thirds (2/3) majority vote. No group had a 2/3 bloc, which would allow them to pass any legislation, including the ASUCD Budget.

Statistical Analysis of Power Structure

A statistical analysis of bills that did not have unanimous support (Senate Bills 29, 35, 36, 42, 54 and Senate Resolutions 3 and 6) shows a more in-depth analysis of the voting blocs (Note: Abstentions are changed to 'no' for the sake of data calculations). Unfortunately, the actual statistics are left as exercise to the reader, and only a few results are elaborated here.

The two major voting factions seem to focus around Maxwell Kappes on one end and Felicia Ong on the other. Because these are the only two senators to have not voted with each other on any of the previously listed bills they easily mark the two sides of the table. Beatriz Anguiano, Armando Figueroa, Alyson Noele Sagala and Kabir Kapur have voted with Kappes on six of the seven listed bills and thus only voted with Ong on one of those bills each. Senators who reliably vote with Ong (again defined as voting with Ong on six of the seven listed bills and therefore voting with Kappes on only one bill each) are Bradley Bottoms and Tal Topf. At the edge of the Kappes faction is Paul Min, who has voted reliably with Figueroa, Anguiano, Kapur, and Sagala. At the center of the table, showing no strong leanings to either side is Liam Burke, Don Gilbert, and Joyce Han. These three senators have voted with Ong slightly more than with Kappes (4-3 Ong's favor) but have voted more consistently with Min than they have with Bottoms and Topf. If these trends continue then the normal vote would reason to be Anguiano/Figuroa/Kappes/Kapur/Min/Sagala on one end and Bottoms/Ong/Topf on the other with Burke/Gilbert/Han casting votes between both factions.

This graph displays partisan votes for the table through their quarter together. A party vote is defined as a vote where the majority of a slate votes in that way. In the case of ties, the "leader" of each slate breaks the tie (in this case Bradley Bottoms for NOW and Alyson Sagala for SMART). In the seven bills used for this set four had support from only one slate and opposition from the other while three were supported by the majority of both slates. Senators with low aggregate X and Y values are the ones to oppose the bills supported by both slates, while those with high aggregate X and Y scores supported such bills. Ultimately that means that the lower the aggregate X and Y score for a senator the bigger of a dissident they were and the higher the aggregate score the bigger of a majoritarian they were. Ininstances on the graph were several markers are nearby they are all actually the same, but spread out for better readability.

Winter 2012 - Fall 2012

Fall 2011- Winter 2012

Winter 2011-Fall 2011

Fall 2010- Winter 2011

Winter 2010- Fall 2010

Fall 2009 - Winter 2010

Winter 2009 - Fall 2009

Fall 2008 - Winter 2009

Winter 2008 - Fall 2008

Shortly before the Fall 2008 Election the GO slate was disbanded by Chair Chris Dietrich which made both Dietrich and Jesse Rosales independents. Rebecca Lovell had disaffiliated with the slate in May of 2008.

Fall 2007 - Winter 2008

Winter 2007 - Fall 2007

* Senate President pro tempore

Fall 2006-Winter 2007

* Senate President pro tempore

Winter 2006 - Fall 2006

* Senate President pro tempore

Past Senate Composition

Fall 2005 - Winter 2006

Accomplishments:

• Rob Roy finally got his staplers in the Computer Labs
• Dealt with the loss of the AS PAPERs archive with the creation of the Special Committee on Miscommunication within the Association
• The Special Committee on Bylaw Consolidation got underway, working to combine the Standing Rules and Government Codes into one document.

(If I recall correctly almost all of these were established or had happened while I was still in office. So that begs the question, to which senate does it really belong? - Eric)

Eric, my memory is a little faulty. Anything you specifically remember voting on, you should move over to the other Senate, though much of the work of the special committees is being done now. Up to you. - Brent

I know I voted on the Miscommunication Special Committee, since I was the pro-temp that meeting and I know I voted on the Consolidation Committee. But, as you pointed out, most of the work has been done after my time. So I don't know to whom the credit really belongs to. - Eric

Winter 2005 to Fall 2005

Achievements

The Spring 2005 Senate table.

• The Countback Amendment passed, as did a constitutional amendment requiring 60% for ASUCD Fee increases.
• Threatened to leave UCSA, which will hopefully lead to a closer relationship with them in the future.
• Passed a budget which allocated 33,000 less to Entertainment Council, $1,000 less to Aggie Pack, and restored funding to Cal Aggie Camp.
• Dissolved ASUCD Campus Safety and the Health and Wellbeing Committee; created the Campus Outreach and Organizing Office (though this was mainly the executive branch's plan).
• Passed a resolution against military recruitment on campus, on the basis that it discriminates against homosexuals.
• El Rodeo had 350 of 800 yearbooks ordered remain unsold, creating a $27,000 deficit in the ASUCD Budget.

Other achievements are detailed on the Friends Urging Campus Kindness Platform.

2004-2005 Commission Chairs

Fall to Winter 2005

Resignations during this term

Accomplishments

The winter 2005 ASUCD Senate table.

• A look at Donald Cohen-Culter's campaign issues
• A look at Student Focus' campaign issues
• A look at LEAD's campaign issues
• During this time, the Gender and Sexuality Commission put on its Sex Toys Workshop, which was awesome but controversial.
• The Senate spent $33,000 on computers and plasma screen telescreens for AGTV to put in the Coffee House.
• The Senate passed the Elections Reform Act of 2005.
• President Kalen Gallagher vetoed a consituional amendment proposals to require a 2/3 vote to approve ASUCD fee increases and another to create the position of the ASUCD External Vice President.

General information

Composition of the Winter 2005 Senate.

This ASUCD Senate term was subject to a wave of resignations, and because the ASUCD President was given the authority to appoint replacement Senators, this resulted in the proposition of new replacement strategies. The most prominent was the Countback system. Additionally, Senate candidate Kai Savaree-Ruess proposed that there be an alternative Senator who is elected during the normal election and takes any vacancy in the ASUCD Senate.

Because of this appointment process, and the 3 resignations that occured, the Student Focus slate controlled 50% of the ASUCD Senate, along with the ASUCD President/ASUCD Vice President positions. Because the ASUCD Vice President (who was then Paloma Perez) acts as the tie-breaking vote, Focus had tremendous power over the way ASUCD was run.

Power structure analysis

Six of the twelve seats were held by Student Focus senators, with LEAD controlling three seats and three seats belonging to independents (Donald Cohen-Cutler, Adam Gerber, Keith Shively. This yielded a Banzhaf index of 60% for Student Focus, and 20% each for both Cohen-Cutler and LEAD, which may suggest that the power distribution in the Senate was out of tune with the preferences of the student body. Of course, this depends on one accepting Banzhaf's quantification of voting power.

After the newly elected Fall 2004 senators took their seats and vacancies were filled by Presidential appointments, LEAD's share of seats dropped to three, with the leftover seats being occupied by independents. Ironically, far from diversifying the range of interests represented on the Senate, the replacement of a LEAD seat with an independent increases Student Focus' power index to 66.67%, while reducing that of the others to a mere 11.11%.

If you were wondering, yes, this meant that each independent has as much power as the entire LEAD block.

Spring to Fall 2004

Accomplishments:

• This Senate was primarily responsible for resolving the Lamargate controversy.
• They bought a $5,000 fire truck for Aggie Pack, thus ensuring that tube socks may be launched upon crowds for generations.

Other Senators from Prior Years

• Kalen Gallagher
• Sara Henry
• Chris Goren
• James Ackerman
• Lee Weissman

Past slates

• The Elections Committee Slate was a fake slate in Winter 2006 consisting of the members of the Elections Committee, mostly as satire of the way the Senate handled the Unqualified Candidates Scandal. "Vote for us; we're going to win anyway!"
• B.E.E.R. - Better Education, Entertainment, and Representation was another jab at everyone else's use of silly acronyms. It was the name that Senator Ari Kalfayan was going to run for the exec office in 2006, but when James Schwab pulled out of the race, so did BEER.
• United Student Alliance attempted to turn patriotism into humor with its two candidates in Fall 2005, but it fell far short of a Senate seat. Candidate Joe Harney took a seat on the ASUCD Court.
• Friends Urging Campus Kindness was very successful in its first and only election and occupied two Senate seats, but essentially fell apart when both of those senators decided to leave the slate — neither believed in a permanent party, as the slate was originally a backlash against the slate system. It lasted from Winter 2005 to Fall 2005.
• People's Collective
• SOSSS - Official website. Came into existence during Spring quarter 2004 and dissolved in Winter quarter 2005 into the newly-formed Friends Urging Campus Kindness slate.
• UNITE - Formed in the November 2001 election by Lee Weissman* and Sara Henry**. That fall they won 5 out of 6 available seats on the ASUCD Senate, winning 83% of the available seats with only 41% support of the voting population. This was one of the landmark factors for the introduction of Choice Voting. The slate dissolved into Student Focus
  • Having run against the slate at the time, I think its safe to say that Weissman founded it. Additionally I'm sure he would take credit for having done so, and nearly every member of the slate would thank Weissman specifically for getting them involved, during their farewell statements later. -KrisFricke
    • Having run ON the slate at the same time, Lee and Sara created together. It was outside Wellmann Hall. Trust me playa, I've heard the story a million times. By the way Lee's name is spelled with 2 n's <3 KG
• Student Action Ticket - This slate only existed for 1-2 elections before it was replaced by Student Focus and L.E.A.D. Lamar Heystek was on Senate during the time of these elections according to his column.
• Aggie Centrist Team

Before the Senate

Believe it or not, ASUCD did not always have a Senate. During the 1980s, the executive and legislative branches weren't so divided, as the chief body of the student government was known as the ASUCD Executive Council. Council was the legislative branch of the ASUCD, as I have seen old bills passed as "Council Bill #5" instead of the modern "Senate Bill #23".

On February 22nd, 1995, the student body passed the "Democracy in Davis Act" (I) by an overwhelming margin, completely reshaping ASUCD into three branches modeled after the federal government from the former executive council model. We have ASUCD President Nguyen and ASUCD Vice President Aaron Bloom to thank for adamantly pushing for these reforms.

Before this, we have the record of the most recent¹ ASUCD Admin Plan to shed some light on the early history of ASUCD:

In 1915 [which is false — it's actually 1910-12-10], students at the University Farm created a student association known as the Associated Students of the University Farm to enhance the quality of student life on campus by providing social and entertainment functions and some student services. In 1933, members of the Association voted in favor of non-voluntary membership fees to finance the activities promoted by the Association. After the Second World War, with returning veterans enrolling under the GI Bill at various institutions across the nation, Davis experienced a greater increase in student population which was met with the promotion of more academic programs.

In 1955, the first floor of the Memorial Union was constructed. And in 1959, the Regents of the University of California designated Davis as a general campus; the student association amended its constitution and by-laws, and the Associated Students of the University of California at Davis (ASUCD) came into existence. During this time, an Executive Committee composed of students, alumni, faculty members, and staff directed the various activities of ASUCD. While under this structure, ASUCD began operating the campus bookstore, the soda fountain, a student store, and began funding Intercollegiate Athletics and campus publications.

In the early 1960's, the Memorial Union developed student-oriented programs, and with the increase in student fees, the University began to provide some services relinquished by ASUCD such as the bookstore and other commercial services. By 1965, significant changes in the the operations of ASUCD had occurred. A change in the constitution reorganized the old Executive Committee into the all-student Legislative Assembly. With campus expansion, completion of the Memorial Union, and the growth of the student body, ASUCD began to create new activities and services to meet the needs of students.

In 1971, the constitution was again changed, the government restructured to parallel the federal system of government with the Senate (legislative), President and Vice President (executive), and the Student Relations Council (judicial). The career staff was reorganized to report only to ASUCD executive officers. Within the next year, the UC System wide Administration recognized all ASUC's as official campus units. ASUCD shared the dual roles of constituent organizations and a campus unit.

With the increase in the ASUCD budget, a career staff position was developed to assist services, especially the programming and commercial services, and to provide continuity from year to year. Late in 1977, ASUCD entered into an agreement with the Graduate Student Association (GSA) to offer some services to graduate students which the GSA could not easily provide. The government changed again in 1978, establishing a modified city-council style government which also provided for advisory commission and an elected president who sits as a member of the Council.

In The Associated Students at the University of California, Davis, an Unincorporated Association, vs. Regents of the University of California (1983), ASUCD actually sued the Regents to regain control over various campus businesses which had been entrusted to the administration (under Chancellor Mrak) in 1966.

• Does someone have a case number for this? I just poked around Lexis-Nexis using every combination of contractions of those plaintiff & defendant names and couldn't find the case. -KrisFricke )=
• Superior Court of the State of California for the County of Yolo, No. 47218.
  • Funny story about that, I was thinking about this while I was making an index of old cases, and then I was like "wait, you know.. the case would be in this Courthouse .. waitaminute, it would be in THIS index!" Flipped about two pages from where I was and found it. Haven't found the actual case though, I'm not sure where cases previous to 1987 are hiding out. What is your source on all this anyway? -KrisFricke
  • Come to the third floor and see the source for yourself.
  • Boo: cases previous to 1987 are at McClellen Air Force Base! WTF. )= -KrisFricke
  • ASUCD Attorney was Thomas H. Frankel (102 E Street, Davis). He seems to still be around...

Footnotes

1. "Council Bill #8, Passed November 6, 1986 :)"