Honor to support sanction debate
By Margaret Bonner | February 14, 2005The Honor Committee voted last night for a resolution to support debate on the sanction reform referendum expected on the spring election ballot. The resolution passed by a vote of 14-4 with four abstentions. Through the resolution, the Committee endorsed the general referendum question "Should the Honor Committee seek alternatives to the single sanction?" The resolution allows the Committee to support the debate on sanction reform, but stipulates the Committee will take no official position on either side of the question. The referendum on sanction reform is expected on the spring ballot through a student petition supported by Hoos Against Single Sanction. Vice Chair for Trials Nick Staubach said the endorsement of the Honor Committee will not affect the referendum, which is expected to appear on the ballot regardless. "This is more about us endorsing the use of honor resources for the debate," Staubach said. The resolution would allow the Committee to support educated debate on what has been a controversial issue at the University. "This is an appropriate and swift response to something that has had a lot of conversation throughout the University," Secretary Elisabeth Epps said. Much of the opposition to last night's resolution stemmed from the wording of the ballot referendum. Committee member Sunit Shah questioned the use of the word 'seek' as opposed to 'explore'. Other committee members expressed concern about the general effect of the language. "The question seems unfairly weighed in the 'yes' direction," Committee member Matt Miller said. Committee member Jeremy Chason said he questioned what sort of mandate the student body would perceive if the referendum passed.


