In its October 20 session, the Senate considered two such appointments, one of which was for the Judicial Board chair. All J-Board issues are of paramount importance; the body is crucial for the preservation of student rights, as it allows civil and disciplinary problems to be addressed by a jury of one’s peers. The J-Board Chair is key to that process, and it should go without saying that the selection thereof is a delicate and weighty task.

Unfortunately, the Senate’s performance at the confirmation of Jonathan Rosenberg ’11 as J-Board chair was—at best—embarrassing. The Senate came to the table confused, unprepared, and generally unaware of its own role, much less that of the Judicial Board. During the approximately two-hour-long approval process, the senators spent more time arguing over their own confirmation process than discussing the qualifications of the candidate before them.

Even the simplest parliamentary procedure seemed to be beyond them; at one point, they needed to take a 10-minute recess after taking a vote in order to figure out how to interpret the results. Other highlights included rampant abuse of the notion of an abstention, a misinterpretation of their own bylaws, and even consideration of the process of suspending those same bylaws in order to salvage the situation.

The proceedings of that meeting were, quite simply, appalling. Worse, the scenario could easily have been avoided. Reading through the important governing documents—bylaws, constitutions, etc.—only takes a few minutes, and every senator should be familiar with the relevant ones before any major confirmation. Senate Parliamentarian Andrew Neidhardt ’11 this week initiated an effort to educate his peers in parliamentary procedure, which, although admirable, is an effort that everyone needs to be involved in.