23 January, 2000

Dear Tom Cochran:

I was not surprised to find you on the street the other day again trying to submarine one of my constitutional amendments with your usual sophistry.  That amendment which you are not fond of passed through the Senate unanimously in September 1999.  

This time, however, you were working your magic not on the SGA President, but rather on Senator Mike Runnels.

Last time this happened, you were able to justify your actions by relying on the SGA Constitution, which holds that the President speaks for the body.  Senator Mike Runnels is neither the President nor the author of the amendment.  

So, how are you going to justify this new interference into the democratic actions of the Senate, Tom?  What new ethic will be created, or bent?  To what new low will you descend?  

I hope you find a good justification, one that will pacify the Senate at least.  Your actions further reduce the credibility of your office.  Soon enough, SGA might have to operate independently of VPSA because of your interference.  That independent operation will not be actuated by me—no others in the Senate and Freshman Board know of your behavior and are ready to do something about it as shown