America's founders created a new nation on the basis of one word: independence.

Since this time, the idea of having the freedom to control our own affairs has been taken quite seriously.

Earlier this week, a commission charged with improving Undergraduate Student Government (USG) released a report suggesting that Penn State President Graham Spanier, the Office of Student Affairs and University Faculty Senate dissolve USG and replace the current organization with a new University Park Undergraduate Association.

Perhaps independence could have been preserved if there were more students on the commission. There were six university officials, compared to only three students on the commission. Common sense dictates that the commission should include mostly students with only one or two university officials, if absolutely necessary.

The final proposal, which would place the decision for dissolution in the university's hands, exchanges the independent nature of USG for a compromising position under, not equal to, the university.

To relinquish self-rule over student government to the university insults reasonable students' sensibilities and compromises the free-from-university oversight that the body now largely enjoys.

The commission's report would absolve the current structure of USG, which means the termination of USG Senate, Academic Assembly, Supreme Court and executive branch.

Radical though it is, the transformation of USG is not altogether as troublesome as is the suggestion that student government subjugate itself to the university president, Student Affairs and Faculty Senate.

If this measure successfully establishes a precedent whereby the university can overtly control and strategically influence the students' government, then what legacy do we leave to the generations of Penn Staters after us?

In addition, students may suffer because the line between student government and university administration will fade and become indistinguishable.

Student government should primarily focus on advocacy of student issues, namely reducing tuition prices. There would be no hope to reduce tuition if the duty of advocating for the issue remains, even if only in part, in the hands of university officials.

The executive branch still has the students' ear. It should do everything in its power to keep that trust. It should focus on improving its footing in the grappling match with the university instead of surrendering it outright while disguising the maneuver as a push for students.