In my five years of involvement in ASUCD, I have seen a lot of extremely shady antics. As I’ve mentioned before, I do not believe power corrupts, I believe power allows the already-prone-to-corruption to show themselves. There are a lot of scandals in real government, and students love to point these out – but what most people don’t realize is that its not because the people involved in our government are more prone to corruption than your average person – its that they have much greater opportunities (and are under much much greater scrutiny, thus revealing every indiscretion).
That said, I believe what ASUCD does is show us how badly your average ambitious person behaves when given a little bit of power. Or at least, when not behaving downright badly, it really exhibits how much their perspectives change to what is convenient for them.
The Good List
Unfortunately, those with exemplary good ethical standards don’t necessarily stand out the way bad ethics do. I would like to start on a good note however, by mentioning those who have impressed me with their ethics:
Surprisingly Admirable:
(ii) ( Ari Kalfayan )
(i) ( Nafeh Malik )
Exemplary Nonstudents:
(ii) ( Don Dudley, SJA & CJB )
(i) ( Mark Champagne )
Actually Exemplary:
(5) ( Go Funai )
(4) & (3) ( Justices Powers & Wheat )
(2) ( Jon Leathers )
(1) ( Aggie Editor-in-Chief Matty Jojola )
It should be noted, that I cannot account for the most EFFECTIVE people in ASUCD, since I am not in a position to judge how well people are running the busses or running GASC etc etc. The above is a list of those who have had the opportunity to show exemplary ethics (or at least, for the group above that, have more value than people give them credit for). And below, below is a list of the most lacking in ethics.
ASUCD’s Most Ethically Misguided
Mildly Annoying:
(iv) ( Paul Harms )
(iii) ( Kalen Gallagher )
(ii-i) ( Sara Henry & Paloma Perez )
Ethically Dysfunctional:(22) ( Thomas Lloyd )
(21) ( Anyone who, during their term, abandoned or defected from the platform they were elected on )
(20) ( Jamie Ackerman )
(19) ( Chris Goran )
(18) ( Mary Vasquez )
(17) ( Aggie Reporter Talia Kennedy )
(16) ( Aggie Reporter Aimee Theron )
(15-11) ( Aggie Editor-in-Chiefs Vo, Whelan, Fuller, Stone & Hamilton )
(10) ( Andrew Peake )
(9) ( Kai Savaree-Ruess )
(8-6) ( The Unqualified Candidates )
(5) ( Rob Roy )
(4) ( Kristen Birdsall )
(3) ( Chief Justice Turner )
(2) ( Vice President Beaman )
(1) ( Tiqula Bledsoe )
(BONUS) ( Bonus! )
And now… I probably have significantly more enemies. It should be noted that I think many of the people mentioned above are very nice people in general. In particular I feel a bit torn about the “Unqualified Candidates” themselves because they all turned out to be pretty nice people and kept themselves out of any further shadiness that I know of, but it would be hard to justify not including them on the list.
Anyway, my hope in posting this is that people who are just becoming involved in ASUCD will read it and keep in mind what NOT to do in the future.
CalMUN Anaheim & the Rest of Last Week
Oct. 25th, 2006 12:24 pm Last Week Monday I was at G Street Pub, and I ran into my former roommate Adrian.
Later on I'd walked halfway back to my car (which was parked a few blocks away in front of the Foyerhouse) When Allan called me to report that he'd found Adrian looking none too lively on a parkbench. I hastily returned to G Street to retrieve him. As I walked back with him to the Foyerhouse again and we were passing Aggie Liquor, we saw Taylor & Matty (who had been lollygagging in front of G St when we left there) pull up and run in for more alcohol. Silly. Anyway, I reinstalled Adrian on the couch he always used to pass out on in our apartment.
Last Wednesday I dropped my car off at the mechanic and then stopped by the police station to see what the status of the case was. The bad news is that they couldn't tell me anything because the DA is still deciding what to do with it, but the good news is the DA apparently is thinking about doing something about it. Also, the officer at the front desk came out from behind the bullet-proof glass to talk to me, which I thought was a nice touch.
Last Thursday evening my internet was down and my car was at the mechanics, and my internet was down so I walked from campus to this party at I & 5th.
As I was walking past Bistro 33 with a 40 of Steel Reserve (high gravity lager!) in a brown paper bag, I noticed that on of the two well-dressed gentlemen waiting in front of Bistro had handcuffs on his belt. Then I noticed the other had a police badge on his. Then that guy asked me how I was doing. wtf, DPD detectives?
Anyway, since I had to be back in that quadrant in the morning to pick up my car anyway, and it would otherwise involve walking across town to get home, and then back again in the morning, the residents of the Foyerhouse were kind enough to let me slumber there (Thanks again guys, Team S unite! =D ) Friday morning I drove down to So Cal without incident. Except I hit LA around rush hour so a normally 7-8 hour trip took 10 hours. Stopped by the hotel in Anaheim where the conference would be and then continued to Mission Viejo. Kristy had come up from San Diego right after work and was already chillaxing with my family when I got there. We went to local / most awesome ever Italian restaurant Salvatore's.
Saturday I had to scamper asap back to Anaheim since the conference began at 8am. I chaired the International Law Commission again, this time discussing Reservations to Multinational Treaties. About 31 delegates in the committee, and they were suprisingly good especially considering it was the first time for most of them. I really wish the UC Davis team would return to CalMUN Anaheim, its a great way to start the year.
My friend Nidia came by to help out on staff but we ended up not needing her. That evening more staff than usual had scampered off whence they came so the usual festivities were rather lacking. In particular, Saturday night activities just can't be the same without technical services director Vern.
On the subject of Vern in particular, I thought it was pretty funny that when we were reading the conference evaluations afterwords, generally negative feedback was only met with laughter. "DPI [Dept of Public Information - Vern] wasn't very courtious" "everything was good but DPI could me more accomodating" "DPI was a jerk!" etc, we all look for the best ones to read aloud for our amusement.
So the usual antics being somewhat lacking, I scampered off to Nidia's, which it turns out was within walking distance. There an impromptu party was quickly developing. Among others who showed up, I was particularly suprised to see some of Aaron's friends (since Aaron knows Nidia through me, a chain of acquantances is developing here).
Anyway, it was irking me that Kristy was only about an hour away, and I missed her, so eventually I scampered off down to San Diego.
On Sunday then, my drive back to Davis was even longer because I was coming from San Diego.
30 in 30 III - 1 - 30 in 30 in 30
Jun. 1st, 2006 11:14 pmThe Journey Home
I was up most of last night reading about people with names like Vercingetorix, Vortigern & Catigern. Then, since I've managed to accumulate some important tasks at the Courthouse I had to go into work. Finally I escaped from there, but had to AMPAC Governor-General Sameer for an hour on the phone about the conference we are in charge of putting together next April, which was all good and well but it was hellorz hot out and I really wanted to go home and take a nap. Then I got home only to find someone parked in my parking place. The office determined the offending vehicle belonged to the guy who should have the spot next to it. When maintenance man Modesto contacted him regarding this, the guy said with attitude "well someone was in MY spot," as if that justified it all (and I hope you all know that you are retarded if you think it solves anything by parking in the person's spot next to you when someone has parked in yours). Finally I made it into my apartment only to find two catsup smeared plates belonging to my flatmate Jason on the livingroom floor, where he seems to think they belong.
This latter offense is in clear violation of the policy my roommates and I had agreed to unanimously, that dishes must remain in one's room if one cannot clean them immediately. I've decided my current policy for dealing with this is moving the dishes for him when he's not home ... onto his bed.
Also the solution to the best way to confront him regarding the fact that he's in flagrant violation of something he just recently agreed to with minimum awkwardness came to me after some thought... next time he's home and I find him in a clear violation of policy, or if he asks me about my relocation of dishes to his room I think I'll ask him in an earnest manner if he thinks the policy is too draconian and needs to be changed. That way I will come across not as accusatory but compromising, while he'll be faced with either feeling like a complete flake by saying this simple policy is too difficult (which I really doubt he'll do), or reaffirming the policy in direct reference to his plate behaviour.
Anyway, then I was finally able to take a nap, but in my delirium was unaware that I'd left my phone in my car so I missed a call I'd been waiting for regarding some stew. )=

30 in 30 III
Anyway, the result of all this is that I'm not really feeling like a top-notch slinger of hilarity at the moment, so 30 in 30 III is off to an inconspicuous start for me this year.
So far we have 30 in 30 posts by apoplecticfittz,
otimus,
pavel_lishin,
roter_terror &
shid. Best entry so far I think is roter_terror's: "Listen up, folks. 30 in 30 is here and I am not ready for it! THEREFORE YOU GET BABY ANIMALS... with a twist! Here are 16 of the best baby animals I could dig up at a moment's notice. Your job is to vote for the best."
Anyway, you may all be relieved to to know that one of my goals for this 30 in 30 is to try to steamline my blogging by spending no less than 30 minutes per post (30 in 30.. IN 30?)
Meanwhile in the real world
In other news, last friday we had the initiation party for the newest batch of Φ A Δ pledglings. On Sunday I went to recently-former Califorina Aggie Editor-in-Chief Matty Jojola's party. It was a very interesting mix of people, with four guys wearing Davis Players Society polos hanging out with Kalen Gallagher in one corner while from the opposite side of the political spectrum city council candidate Rob Roy campaigned in the kitchen wearing a suit & tie. I got a scandalous picture of him eating a watermelon rind with some girl, as well as another of him giving someone a classic politician handshake, I'll put them up when I get a chance. Also my fellow justice & reverend Tim Coady was there, marrying people at random and granting indulgences.
On Tuesday most of the Court came to the Internal Affairs Commission to discuss their opinions on the Court. Also this day we were reinforced by an editorial in The Aggie advocating that our Court be strengthened rather than abrogated. IAC was unwilling to concede anything, but none of them would speak in support of any of their arguments (other than that ASUCD is a business), preferring rather to try repeatedly to end the whole conversation by saying there was no legislation regardnig the subject. Aside from the fact that the discussion the preceding week had ended with "we'll talk more about this next week," I've certainly been around long enough to know that there's always "no plans," until suddently there are, and the plans are never put forward until after the political maneouvering stage.
nbsp; Also they made an obvious effort to put us off as long as possible, which I thought was kind of petty & desperate. Regarding ASUCD as a business, it went around a few times until Chairman Harms announced his revelation that "ASUCD is not a government OR a business, it is an association." To which I responded that that was great but "what we are specifically arguing about here is that Kai Savaree-Ruess said ASUCD is 'not a public institution ... but in fact a business,' and a Court has no place in a business. If you say we're not a business but an association, you're not backing Kai's argument that I am here to counter..." I believe 90% of arguments improperly lost are lost because one allowed the opponent to change what the argument was about.. never let them get away with this.
Anyway, since then Paul Harms has ceased to be the Internal Affairs Commission Chairman...
Picture of the Day

Kristy and I at Rock It
Previously on Emosnail
Three Years Ago Today: Jello Shot Night - What we all did before we had 30 in 30 to occupy ourselves: slosha's dorm-mates throw a party which shall live on in infamy as "jello shot night." ...Kristy is eventually determined to be missing and is then found wandering aimlessly three floors down outside... d=
Two Years Ago Today: 30 in 30 I - Day 1 - mrkevincostner was actually first out of the blocks at 10:20am, followed by
stephenl who at 12:56 posted the official call to action.
apoplecticfittz began with a new version of his recent Frasky Awards;
lerani started with an amusing story about a retarded lawyer that managed to exponentially exacerbate her own ethics violation;
fragglerocker84 started out strong with a well composed entry apparently about people on her vollyball team (its very well done for its subject matter, but the subject isn't the most interesting to random bloggers); and
feuders also vows for the course of 30 in 30 to drink no beer (except for a number of frequent exceptions), eat no fast food, and run five miles every day. Additionally,
jdryznar declares he's going to make 30 posts in 30 days about politics, while
incomple also just posts half baked ravings against conservatives (at least for the first five I checked today).
Year Ago Today: 30 in 30 II - Day 1 - First day of the second annual 30 in 30. Best entry for this day has been identified as Professor David, with second place going to otimus (who has since deleted his all his 30 in 30 II entrie, because he does strange things like that)
Justice in ASUCD
Jan. 14th, 2005 12:57 pm "...I hereby resign ... I was in the freshman dorms, I never lied about that. Fact is, I was told to go there by my Focus [his party] advisors ... and you all sit around smiling smugly as if you didn't do the same. Not only that but I know many of you were drunk during budget hearings..." -(former) ASUCD Senator Nafeh Malik (paraphrased here, I don't have an exact transcript), resigning in lieu of the campaigning in the dorms controversy.
"wow um... I think we need a ten minute break now to recollect ourselves." -Vice President Paloma Perez. "actually... I resign as well... -(former) ASUCD Senator Sean Reul.
"The word is FUBAR" -ASUCD Senator Donald Cohen-Cutler on his cell phone immediately after a recess was subsequently called.
"I'm... not resigning..." -ASUCD Senator Brianna Haag, the third implicated new Focus senator, as an anxious silence awaits her report.
"I'm resigning... from all my other positions" -ASUCD Business & Finance Commission Chairman Alan Pang. "So wait, you're remaining in this one?" -President Kalen Gallagher, interjecting in the subsequent confusion. "yes." Room breaths an exasperated sigh of relief, Internal Affiars Commission Chairwoman Kahliah Laney looks like she's having a heart attack.
Also at yesterdays senate meeting they swore in former Focus candidate Cari Ham to fill the senate seat earlier vacated by Lead senator Adam Barr. Selection of senators to fill vacated seats is the sole discretion of the ASUCD president.

Aggie photographer Matt Jojola (
![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
Jurisprudence in ASUCD
President Gallagher ostensably vetoed the bill passed by senate last quarter to allow ASUCD Court members to write legislation. He justified it by saying that US Supreme Court justices don't write legislation, among other things.
In response, I firstly pointed out that as the ASUCD president has until the next regularly scheduled senate meeting to veto legislation, and that has already transpired, his veto is unconstitutional. So what happens now is either the relevant government body can refuse to recognize his veto in light of its manifest unconstitutionality, or it can be reversed in a case. The former more convenient method is unlikely to occur so either I will be filing a case myself, or if I don't other people have said they will certainly file one. Obviously either way I wouldn't be sitting on the case though.
Furthermore I pointed out that in the national arena, one has the Justice Department, the Bar Association, numerous other law related lobby groups, and armies of lawyers who love to tinker with the law. In ASUCD the only semblance of any of these is the ASUCD Court. To say the court can't write legislation is to say that no judicial legislation will be written in ASUCD, and that is ridiculous.
Also I mentioned that Marberry v Madison in 1807 established that the US Supreme Court could review issues that inherently involved the Court, thus negating the opposing argument that if Court members wrote legislation it would be a conflict of interest for them. To this Commissioner Gordon "I was president of my JC" Fung responded that he didn't think Marberry v Madison applied in this situation. In response I proceeded to give a brief history of the circumstances and significance of Marberry v Madison for the Senate.
Chairperson Jenni Beeman then asked why we were citing US Supreme Court cases as relevant to ASUCD. This prompted me to give the Senate a brief overview of legal theory and jurisprudence.
In summary, it was altogether good times.

ASUCD Senators Keith Shively, Janine Fiel, & Darnell Holloway during Thursdays meeting.