TO THE EDITOR:
In Wednesday’s The Daily Tar Heel article on GPSF’s potential separation, it was repeatedly stated that GPSF wanted to remove graduate and professional representation from the legislative branch of student government, Student Congress. This is not the case, nor has it ever been the case. Rather, the GPSF separation movement pertains to removing graduate and professional students from student government as a whole.
Regarding the issue at hand, it is hard to see such a division as a positive change for the student body. According to GPSF leadership, the solution to the issues we’re experiencing is not additional collaboration, but rather the establishment of two student governments: one for undergraduates and one for graduate and professional students. Alternatively, as it has been dubbed, two governments for two student bodies.
The phrase “Two Governments for Two Student Bodies” is based on the belief that graduate and professional students experience Carolina differently than undergraduates. This is true, but it is similarly true that there are numerous communities of students who could make this same claim. Do out-of-state students not face different challenges at UNC than in-state students? Do transfer students not face different challenges than those of us who began our collegiate career here? The solution cannot be separate student governments for each of these communities, but rather a student government that empowers all these communities to collaborate and unite behind bettering the campus for everyone.
Further, we have to recognize that there are countless issues on campus that we need to be united to fix. In the past few weeks, we have seen a number of examples that include sexual assault policy and students rallying together to voice concerns over police brutality and marginalization of POC bodies. These are not issues we should bring to administrators separately and divided upon. We must work together and provide a cohesive voice to all communities.
Cole Simons
Speaker, Student Congress
