We have a misconstrued conception about Student Senate. Its power comes from providing avenues for students to take up their issues with other students. But that’s the thing: they are taking these issues up with other students.

Now, before I get too far into this discussion, I will say that I think Nick Prince and Jen Fox have done a terrific job as Co-Presidents of Student Senate, and I think both have the students’ best interests in mind. I also think Senate provides a great opportunity for students to have a real say in many political areas that affect them. Senate has been a facilitator of student discussion and concerns, and those who dedicate themselves to Senate are doing it because they believe in its promise.

The misconception is that many view Senate as an organization that has direct contact with the Board of Trustees. While I’m sure that communication between Senate and the higher-ups is effective, it is still not the same as having a student representative in a higher group. The reasoning for this would be to give students a louder voice on campus, perhaps even a more cohesive voice that would enable students with the ability to directly address concerns on campus.

The good news for all you Golden Gusties is that there are still ample ways to get involved in major campus decisions, such as the renewal of the beverage contract at the end of the school year. My last article revolved too much around political jest. You deserve better, Dining Services deserves better and the issue is too important to not correct. It should also be noted that I unfairly used President Ohle as a symbol and scapegoat, and I apologize for misrepresenting his role in the issue at hand.

At any rate, Gustavus administration is giving you, your class, your group, the opportunity to share your voice with ears that are waiting to hear suggestions from students. They are seeking information which would contribute in two different ways: “(1) Questions we could ask the company about its practices or its products—labor, environmental, health, economic and (2) requests for ideas about how the company could be involved in Gustavus initiatives—health, environmental, justice, e.g.” So, bros and bro-ettes, get cracking on those one page proposals about the ethical issues behind Pepsi and Coke.

Steve Kjellgren and the rest of the administration have done, and continue to do, a fantastic job in researching the question of which company to go with. But students also have the ability to help make this decision.

According to Lisa Heldke, Professor of Philosophy and  Kitchen Cabinet Chair, for the past seven months the administration has been asking, inviting, urging students to do research and put together a proposal to argue systematically what decision we should make and why. If, for example, a petition were signed with 65 percent of students advocating for one company over the other, no matter what the proposals were from Pepsi or Coke, Gustavus would actually listen to YOUR voice and use it to make decisions.

As a senior this year, this decision really doesn’t affect me too much. Sure, every time I come back on campus after this I may be forced to guzzle Sprite instead of Sierra Mist, but nevertheless, my presence at Gustavus is drawing to a close. But this decision will mostly affect remaining and future Gusties. For us to be a school that prides itself on justice and community, there needs to be real student dialogue on the issues that matter. Quite possibly Coca-Cola may be the best choice for us, but students must make known their own research and ideas.

Kjellgren and others have used this opportunity to get students involved and to create a real ethical dialogue on campus that affects us all by paying close attention to what students think about the Market Place. Let us not waste the opportunity, but instead seize it to show that students, at least in Gustavus politics, still have a voice.