I've been to exactly two Undergraduate Senate meetings. I hope never to attend another.

Most of the people in senate are there because they are interested in civil and political policy and they believe it helps the causes they support.

But most are unaware of and/or lax in their responsibilities as written in the bylaws and uneducated in the policies and issues that they discuss.

I do not principly support the conservative majority in the senate. However, I find it ironic that, of all its members, that the senate would choose to ask Jason Covener to resign.

It is Jason Covener who has tried to acknowledge and work with legitimate concerns of all parties when addressing legislation. Covener has put forth the majority of successful legislation, and worked to make amendments to legislation so that USG could actually be actively useful, instead of a haven for directionless lengthy bickering.

Covener has an extremely abrasive style on occasion, but he has made it his business to know more about the procedures and laws of USG than some of its chairs; the 'demands' he has made of lax senate members are within his jurisdiction.

On hurting the image of USG: (1) Covener was banned once for action decreed disgraceful, but USG has lifted that ban of its own accord because Jason was judged improved.

To renege on that decision without legitimate evidence is hypocritical. (2) Most students have nothing good to say about USG, and the squabble over Covener can't improve it. (3) Anyone who knows anything about USG's recent activities must acknowledge that Covener is an asset to unified USG activity.