Proceeding with the looming $50,000 recall election of ASUC Senator John Moghtader without further deliberation-just because five students were able to gather a minimum of 1,000 signatures-ignores precautions necessary in these troubling times.

Whether or not funds were already set aside for this situation is irrelevant. No matter how you look at it, the money still ultimately comes out of the pockets of students who had paid the fees with reasonable expectations of reaping direct benefits from them. Regardless of the affordability of the election, shelling out $50,000 without exploring other possibilities does a disservice to the student organizations banking on ASUC funding.

And if the recall election were to occur, it comes at a price that isn't negotiable. For the sake of fairness, that amount must be spent in order to conduct it in a manner similar to regular spring ASUC elections, which includes adequate publicity, accessibility to polling stations and ample opportunities for voting.

And that inevitable expenditure calls the procedures for recalling a senator into question. Considering that only about one-third of UC Berkeley's 33,000 students voted in the last ASUC election, there's no denying the 1,000-plus who signed the petition constitute a substantial voice on campus. But 1,000 signatures shouldn't automatically lead to a recall election.

The lesson here is that the exact grounds for recalling an official must be clearly stipulated in the ASUC Constitution. Conceivably, amendments can be made to include conviction of a crime or shirking elected duties as a sufficient pretext for the removal process. Then it should be left to the judicial council, a branch free from party affiliations, to verify petitions before a recall begins.

For now, we can only hope Moghtader and the ASUC senate will thoroughly weigh their options before continuing. Among them include Moghtader's voluntarily resignation. After all, it's our $50,000.