Dear Senator Luti and Fellow Senators of the SGA,

        I applaud the energy of Senator Luti to propose the following amendments
to the SGA Constitution.  However, I inherently disagree with both of them
for the following reasons:

        The "Oath of Office Amendment" already exists for the President and I
don't see how holding Senators who are for the most part more interested in
bending and breaking the rules to what would become a "rhetorical oath of
ceremony" necessary or effective.  The Senate this year was more interested
in retreats and floats than it was in oaths of honor and law.  Therefore
why waste space and paper with an "empty amendment".  Good idea but not
needed or realistic.

        Your Second Amendment would be passed the day I hang a poster of Jimmy
Carter in my room.  The reasons are as follows:  The Senate has failed and
decided not to take an official stand on the issue of impeachment outside
of the present provision in the Constitution.  An investigation committee
creates a window for more gossip, false attacks on individuals, creates
more beaurcracy, and would never come to a consensus for the Senate never
has over this issue.  Furthermore, this is not 1955 (unfortunately for my
wardrobe) the Red Scare, the Committee on Un-American Activities, and the
days of political investigations especially at the liberal playground of
UVM won't happen.  Furthermore, I caution the esteemed Senator that it is
not the summer of 1974 and the last thing the Senate needs is another
committee, expecially one devoted to investigating matters which the
current provision in the Constitution leaves for the Senate to decide anyway.
        Finally, I remind the Senate, that numerous senators have stated on record
that "Who are we to adjudicate fellow Sentor's Behavior as well as the
Executive." "And when are we not Senator's etc."  All of these issues have
been debated at lenght on the Senate Floor and have resulted in the body
upholding the current Constitution and deciding not to take any action on
the issue of impeachment.
        Therefore, I, Senator Robert A. Pontbriand would be in disfavor of both
Amendment proposals and would vote "No" on the adoption of both amendments
and urge Senator Luti to allow the Constitution Committee to pursue these
matters in more detail in conjunction with the Executive Branch and Pat Brown.

                                Sincerely,

                        Senator Robert A. Pontbriand

                        Academic Affairs Committee
                        SGA Constitutional Committee
At 10:23 PM 3/24/98 -0500, you wrote:
>To: All SGA Senators
>From: Brian P. Luti
>RE: Two Amendments to the Constitution.
>
>        At next Tuesday's meeting, I plan on proposing the following
>amendments. Please feel free to send me your suggestions concerning these
>amendments.
>
>AMENDMENT I
>Section 1.)
>        This amendment would amend Article II, Section 1, Paragraph N;
>Section 2, Paragraph I; Section 3, Paragraph J; and Article III, Section
>2, Paragraph L. It would amend these sections in the following ways:
>
>        *Article II*
>        Section 1, Paragraph N:
>                Shall take an oath of office, administered by the
>                President of the previous SGA Senate.
>
>        Section 2, Paragraph I:
>                Shall take an oath of office, administered by the
>                President of the SGA Senate.
>
>        Section 3, Paragraph J:
>                Shall take an oath of office, administered by the
>                President of the SGA Senate.
>
>        *Article III*
>        Section 2, Paragraph L
>                Shall take an oath of office, administered by the
>                President of the SGA Senate.
>
>Section 2.)
>The oath of office will be written by the President of the previous year's
>SGA Senate, and submitted to Senate, to be amended as necessary and voted
>on by a 2/3s majority.
>
>Section 3.)
>This amendment would become effective at the first meeting of the 1998-99
>SGA Senate.
>
>
>AMENDMENT II
>        This amendment would amend Article VIII, Section 2 by adding the
>following clause:
>
>        If the Senate deems that further investigation into the matter of
>impeachment is needed, they may vote to form an Investigations Committee,
>by a majority vote of the Senate. An Investigations Committee would be
>formed of Seven Senators, to be chosen by the Senate immediately following
>the creation of such a committee. Each Senator would be appointed by a
>majority vote.
>        The Investigations Committee would have no more than three weeks
>to investigate matters of impeachment, from the time of its formation. At
>the end of those three weeks, the Investigations Committee would report to
>the Senate its findings. Extensions of time may be granted by 2/3 majority
>of the Senate.
>
>
>                                        Brian P. Luti
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
>"One man with courage makes a majority." -Andrew Jackson, 7th President, USA
>+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
+++++
>"[Change] can only be bought by a bullet in one hand and a ballot paper in
> the other." -Gerry Adams, MP of West Belfast, President of Sinn Fein
>===========================================================================
=====
>"Dogs love trucks." -Nissan guy
>---------------------------------------------------------------------------
-----
>
>