The proclamation on the Stevens Divest From War Initiative (SDFWI)—a proclamation presented to the Student Government Association (SGA) to divest the school’s endowment from companies or investments that violate international law and human rights principles—failed to pass after a second round of debate.
The proclamation was first presented at a Senate meeting on February 23. After a lengthy debate, the Senate decided to table the vote to allow for amendments to be made that addressed prominent concerns with the proclamation’s content. At that meeting, the proclamation’s proposer, Senator Osinachi Uga, along with its authors, Mohamed Bengabsia and James Hooker, expressed their intent to work with the SGA to revise the proclamation, address student concerns, and secure Senate support.
However, at the next Senate meeting on Sunday, March 2, the SGA Senate failed to pass the amended proclamation, falling short of the required two-thirds supermajority.
The Stute had the opportunity to discuss the changes to the proclamation and the proposal with members of both SDFWI and the SGA.
Senator Evan Papageorge, who collaborated with SDFWI representatives on the revisions, explained that while the SGA could only propose amendments to the proclamation, they provided feedback to the writers on improving the proposal. ‘The amendment’s main goal was to shift the proclamation from an ultimatum to the Board of Trustees into more of a conversation about how we can move forward and ensure all students have a say in the next steps,’ Papageorge stated.
James Hooker, one of the proposal’s contributors, added that the revised version aimed to address concerns that the original was perceived as political and that some student groups found it exclusionary. In the section titled, “Letter to the Senators,” Hooker wrote, “To address the concerns raised in the previous meeting, we have modified our proposal to highlight the six principles for divestment logistically, rather than politically.”
The specific changes made to the proposal are listed below:
- The clarification of communications between SGA, student orgs, and the Board of Trustees, replacing the original CIR and “lines of accountability.”
- Details on the unofficial form and tabling, acknowledging potential statistical bias (Section 3.1).
- Slight amendments to the divestment criteria, clarifying the relationship between divestment and student activity (Section 4.2).
- The addition of Section 4.3, “ESG Investments: Financial Performance vs. Traditional Investments,” to discuss potential avenues for implementation.
- The addition of Appendix B, “What SDFWI Is Not.”
- United Nations and other reputable definitions and quotations supporting the principles (Glossary).
Rules Chair Aden Vishnevsky held an emergency Rules Committee meeting on Wednesday, February 26, to discuss the potential changes before the Senate vote. Vishnevsky stated that the open discussion and collaboration between the SGA and SDFWI allowed for a timely and smooth implementation of amendments to both the proclamation and the proposal.
At the March 2 Senate meeting, discussions resumed with a public forum, where attendees shared their stances on the matter, advocating for different courses of action from the SGA.
Following the public forum, Senator Uga, Bengabsia, and Hooker presented the updated proclamation and proposal. The focus of their presentation revolved around impact investing and following environmental, social, and governance (ESG) principles. They argued that abiding by ESG principles in the long term could produce the same or even better financial returns, addressing senators’ concerns regarding the financial viability of divestment while ensuring continued funding for scholarships and research.
Following the presentation, the Senate renewed its consideration of the proposal. Some senators approved of the alterations that SDFWI made to the original bill and acknowledged the timely efforts made, while others maintained that the changes did not sufficiently address their concerns. Others argued that achieving 12.4% of the student body’s input on the matter, despite potential statistical biases, should be factored into the decision. However, some senators questioned whether the changes were effective enough to represent all student groups. Others expressed difficulty in drawing clear ethical lines regarding corporate practices, noting that some companies produce both defense and civilian technologies.
At the conclusion of the discussion, Senate voting guidelines were communicated. 36 senators were in attendance, more than the 2/3 required to meet quorum. Senators had the option to vote “yes” in favor of the bill, “no” in opposition, or “abstain” to refrain from participating. While abstentions were allowed, if 1/3 of senators abstained, the bill would automatically fail. Proclamations require at least 2/3 of all senators to pass, which in this case meant a minimum of 24 votes in favor. Voting was conducted via an online Google Form, the results of which were available only to SGA President Alexander Stanczak. After all votes were submitted, President Stanczak announced that the proclamation had failed to pass, with 22 votes in favor, 12 against, and two abstentions.
Following the Senate vote and result announcement, Hooker stated that SDFWI will continue working toward its goals through collaboration with the student body, alumni, faculty, and staff while continuing to advocate based on the six principles of divestment outlined in their proposal.
The Stute also had the opportunity to interview Maeryn Erdheim, the President of Hillel and a representative of the Jewish community on campus. “I feel relieved at the outcome of the vote,” shared Erdheim. She was among those who spoke against the proclamation during the public forum, stating that even with the changes, the proclamation and proposal made minimal adjustments to their stance on Israel, a key concern raised at the prior Senate meeting. She expressed that, in her view, the revised version continued to alienate some Jewish students.
While the proclamation failed to pass, President Stanczak noted that SDFWI could continue to engage with the SGA while also acknowledging that some opposition voices that remained concerned about the broader implications of the initiative. For example, SDFWI could propose a new proclamation addressing the matter.
Additionally, Stanczak cited the significant number of senators who voted in favor as a continued support system for SDFWI in furthering its goals. Stanczak also highlighted that vacancy elections for the SGA were currently taking place and encouraged students interested in making an impact to consider running for senator.
Lastly, Stanczak made it clear that the SGA does not condone hateful speech or discrimination following an incident during the meeting in which a participant on Zoom unmuted their mic and uttered a racial slur. He concluded by expressing pride in all participants for engaging in the matter with productive and respectful discussions.
