Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Georgetown University’s Newspaper of Record since 1920

The Hoya

Vote Joyce-Lovejoy for GUSA

For two years, Calen Angert (MSB ’11) and Jason Kluger (MSB ’11) have overseen unprecedented institutional strengthening of the Georgetown University Student Association. This week, as we interviewed the four tickets vying to take their spots, we sought out a pair that would capitalize on sweeping reforms while impacting the everyday lives of students.

We’ve found our match in Charlie Joyce (COL ’12) and Paige Lovejoy (SFS ’12), a team that packs just the right punch: experience with fresh perspective, and long-range vision with optimistic practicality.

Under the tutelage of Angert and Kluger, GUSA was transformed into a more effective and in the eyes of many students, more legitimate organization. Seeing through the monumental initiatives Angert and Kluger debuted during their terms is critical to any viable ticket in this year’s election. GUSA must maintain its latest successes, and the programs launched by Angert and his outgoing team must not be abandoned.

Both the Mike Meaney (SFS ’12) and Greg Laverriere (COL ’12) and the Joyce and Lovejoy campaigns fit this bill. Meaney, during his tenure as one of Angert and Kluger’s chief policy advisers, is perhaps most familiar with the GUSA initiatives currently in the works. Similarly, Laverriere, the primary architect of Student Activities Fee and Endowment reform, is the most well-versed among the candidates on the always-contentious issue of club funding.

But Joyce and Lovejoy are no GUSA rookies. Their respective experience in the GUSA executive and the constitutional council would ease the transition. What’s more, the platforms of both tickets state a commitment to extending programs already launched, like the LSAT familiarization course, the soon-to-be-debuted farmer’s market and SAFE reform.

While continuity following the institutional restructuring that occurred under Angert and Kluger is necessary, the “LoveJoyce” ticket also promises new solutions to more concrete issues facing students everyday. They are focused on practical, short-term objectives that will complement their long-term goals.

GUSA is now at a juncture where it can use its newly buffed muscles to tangibly improve day-to-day student life. To this end, the theme of the “LoveJoyce” campaign is accessibility; they aim to cut back on the rampant student frustration that stems from campus bureaucracy.

Their simplest, but most impressive, proposal is the creation of a “WikiHow Georgetown” website that would aggregate instructions and advice for a variety of processes affecting students, from requesting classrooms to generating activity funds, from filing study abroad applications to finding roommates after freshman year.

If managed well, the WikiHow site would save students countless hours of confusion and frustration by handing them a step-by-step guide to the labyrinth of Georgetown life. By documenting on-campus bureaucracy, the “WikiHow Georgetown” site could function as the first step toward cutting back on the red tape.

Joyce and Lovejoy have also given some serious thought to the issue of on-campus study space. They want to push for greater access to the Rafik B. Hariri Building for non-business students and explore the possibility of converting Walsh Building classrooms into nighttime study areas. Both proposals demonstrate that these candidates have an acute understanding of the basic issues affecting their peers. But most importantly, the Joyce-Lovejoy ticket fuses this average student know-how with GUSA experience for a broader perspective of what students want and what GUSA can feasibly do.

This pair is concerned with serving the revitalized GUSA, but more importantly, reaching out and catering to the entire student body. While Angert and Kluger have made strong institutional improvements to GUSA, many on campus still lack a clear understanding of what GUSA is. Fellow candidates Jed Feiman (COL ’12) and Henry Sims (COL ’12) have also validly expressed this common concern in their campaign. Joyce and Lovejoy’s determination to practicably better campus life for as many students as possible would give way to a more visible and transparent GUSA.

But where Joyce and Lovejoy’s platform falls short is in the areas of the Student Code of Conduct and student safety. Georgetown’s disciplinary regime is unfairly stringent, placing students who want to defend themselves against accusations at a distinct disadvantage.

Candidates Ace Factor (COL ’12) and James Pickens (COL ’12) have suggested establishing a student advocacy center as a temporary fix, while also pursuing liberal reforms of the Student Code of Conduct. They envision the center training students to be fluent in the code so that they can inform and advocate for their peers who face penalties. A student advocacy center could also serve as a stepping stone to more dramatic and much-needed discussions about the Student Code of Conduct. Joyce and Lovejoy, if elected, ought to consider expanding their agenda to include a similar project.

Joyce and Lovejoy’s platform was also somewhat lacking on student safety proposals. Nevertheless, Joyce established valuable connections with the Department of Public Safety during his term as GUSA executive for tudent safety that would prove useful if he were president. Furthermore, their plan to push the university to install automatic locks on townhouses and apartments is also, like most of their platform, practical and achievable. GUSA is, of course, limited in what it can do to protect students, Joyce and Lovejoy, if elected, will have to strive to develop both innovative ways to better student safety and to act as a mediator between students and DPS.

All of the candidates’ platforms are weak when it comes to community outreach and neighbor relations. While each of the GUSA hopefuls proposes a different strategy for communicating with residents of surrounding neighborhoods, their visions are incomplete and unspecific across the board.

The Factor-Pickens and Feiman-Sims tickets, for example, recommend devoting more GUSA funds to groups like the GU Samaritans, which aid neighbors in everything from shoveling snow to cleaning up sidewalks. Joyce and Lovejoy plan to encourage neighbors to attend on-campus events and performances so that they might appreciate that Georgetown students produce high-quality work and entertainment. While these ideas are all strategies to better the reputation of students in small ways, none of the platforms include strong proposals for improving the town-gown conversation. Clearly, the absence of community outreach strategies among the presidential candidates indicates that increasing positive interactions between students and neighbors is a complex challenge that will require the utmost care.

Moving forward, the GUSA executive faces a slew of persistent challenges, even after two years’ worth of Angert-Kluger initiative. With Joyce and Lovejoy, we endorse a pair ready to tackle these issues through actionable plans crafted for the improvement of Georgetown student life.

Leave a Comment
Donate to The Hoya

Your donation will support the student journalists of Georgetown University. Your contribution will allow us to purchase equipment and cover our annual website hosting costs.

More to Discover
Donate to The Hoya

Comments (0)

All The Hoya Picks Reader Picks Sort: Newest

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *