Several misunderstandings in a recent op-ed on Nolan Pack’s ASUC Senate performance and the role of the Office of the Executive Vice President have forced us to leave our happy retirement as former ASUC officials and once again address The Daily Californian. Drawing from our experiences working with Pack during our 2012-13 senate term, we want to correct our colleagues’ portrayal of him and clarify the role of the executive vice president’s office to dispel any further misinterpretations of that office.
In the op-ed by two of our senate colleagues, former Senators Deo and Hua, Pack was described as both “one of the most polarizing figures while he served as Senator” as well as “disrespectful to his fellow Senators who opposed his opinions.” In our experience as a Student Action senator and a Cooperative Movement senator, we have worked across party lines and have had the engaging experience of being on the opposite side of Pack’s opinion. Based on our experiences, we think our colleagues’ depiction of Pack’s character couldn’t be further from the truth.
Pack was the most productive and talented critical thinker in our senate class. He pushed the boundaries of our senate and provoked members to think intellectually. Our senate colleagues must not have been present at the meetings when Pack created the Student Environmental Resource Center, helped spearhead the fossil fuel divestment movement here at UC Berkeley, organized queer town halls and created the first campuswide queer newsletter. They must have been elsewhere when Pack stood up for human rights when it came to the issue of divesting from companies that profit from and facilitate Israeli human rights violations in occupied Palestine, when he led structural and administrative reform for the ASUC and when he wrote more than 30 successful senate bills — many of which have gained national attention and none of which failed.
There is a saying that “success comes from compromise,” and we have seen many senate projects and bills fail over the years simply because ASUC officials failed to keep this concept in mind.
Contrary to what last week’s op-ed suggested, much of Pack’s success developed through his willingness to compromise. After simultaneously serving in the environmental, queer and transfer-student community, Pack has gained a healthy focus on collaboration and getting substantive work done. He continues to have great working relationships with members of all the ASUC parties as well as many campus organizations, leaders and students. Pack’s success could not have been possible without his talent for compromise, the approval of the senate we have all served on or our experience working across party lines, and Pack’s track record as the most productive senator of our term can attest to that.
As for the role of the executive vice president — contrary to the vision of the neutral legislative chair preached in our senate colleagues’ op-ed — the office is deliberately designed to be political and non-neutral. Overlooking the definition of the EVP’s office in the ASUC Constitution, our colleagues reduced its “main role … to facilitat(ing) ASUC Senate discussion and maintain(ing) respect for all opinions in the chambers.” They must have overlooked Article 2, Section 3 of the ASUC Constitution, which states that in addition to serving “as the chairperson of the ASUC senate,” the EVP must also “vote to break a tie vote of the ASUC senate.” This section further expands the office of the EVP, identifying its primary role as “serv(ing) as the second-ranking representative of the Association,” responsible for “ensur(ing) that actions directed by the senate are performed.” Chairing the senate is clearly only part of the role, and one must recognize that the EVP’s office is institutionally designed by the ASUC Constitution to be a political, and by evidence of its vote-making responsibility, non-neutral office.
Pack was elected for his leadership on many issues as well as for his ability to advocate student interests and ensure that all voices in our diverse student community are heard. His job is to keep all the ASUC officials — senate, judicial and executive — transparent and accountable to the student community. This myth of neutrality is false, unsubstantiated and indeed directly contradicted by the ASUC’s legal documents. The EVP is supposed to break ties on senate votes and should be just as opinionated as every other legislative chair in the ASUC. All legislative chairs enter office with an agenda; they each aim to represent and serve the communities that elected them in. This myth that the EVP must be a neutral legislative chair must be put to rest.
As for our colleagues’ prophesy that Pack will be “the main catalyst for what looks to be the most ineffective and contentious ASUC that this school has ever seen,” we would like to remind our colleagues that our student government is 131 years old and that Pack has only chaired three meetings so far. We don’t think that one of the most hardworking and devoted public servants to our university will usher in a dark age in the 131-year history of the ASUC like they foretell, especially so early in the semester. We give more credit to this year’s senate class and trust their ability to effectively maintain and utilize this institution — representing arguably the most influential student body in the nation — and have faith that this senate class will outshine the last under Pack’s leadership.
Lastly, we would like to reiterate that as former ASUC officials, we were initially extremely reluctant to write an op-ed in The Daily Californian and only did so in response to the inflammatory allegations made by our senate colleagues. We recognize that former ASUC officials are former ASUC officials and that they should, with dignity, move on with their lives.