Wednesday’s decision to not have the proposed $48 network fee appear on the April 22 student government election ballot was not the Student Senate’s wisest one of late.

As the academic year winds down, students obviously are increasingly bombarded with ample strenuous course work, and the stress of it all inevitably multiplies as finals creep closer and closer. However, their voice in whether the network fee is passed is imperative.

Although the proposed network fee, if passed, would seemingly bolster Eastern’s network infrastructure providing a shot-in-the-arm to the system with more connectivity and reliability, a student decision to defeat the fee could be overridden by the administration.

Students elect the Student Senate to be their voice, but since the Board of Trustees has the authority to override the senate’s decisions, students may not be getting what they want. The BOT may always have the final say as to whether fees are passed, but it would be uplifting if students could have more of a say with this particular fee.

The intentions of Bill Davidson, speaker of the senate who authored the bill; Information Technology Services workers; and Alan Baharlou, geology/geography chair who proposed network fee to the Tuition and Fee Review Committee, are obviously good.

Senate wants to get students behind a fee of this stature and is willing to take the time and do plenty of work promoting the benefits such a fee would give students with. The BOT should not override the decision the senate makes.

Unfortunately, at this juncture in the academic year, not too many students are dwelling on fees; they are focused on classes, and rightfully so. Emphasizing the upsides of a network fee is important, and senate thankfully seems adamant about properly informing students on it.

However, even though the senate is the student body’s voice it would be encouraging if students had the opportunity to have an even bigger voice in this manner by means of the election ballot.

The number of students who vote might not dramatically increase by going overboard on informing the student body on the complexities of the fee, but it couldn’t hurt either.

The Student Senate easily could have voted to slap the proposed network fee on the April 22 election ballot, but now that it won’t be, the senate’s forum tonight might not entice as many students as it would have otherwise. Consequently, those students who would have been clamoring to hit the polls to submit their vote of approval or disapproval, now might just be forced to sit back and watch the BOT override a senate decision that mirrors students’ desires.

However, the senate’s decision to hold a forum tonight to further inform students on how the proposed fee could improve the network and its idea to distribute surveys on the fee is something the organization should be applauded for.

More work to adequately gather a significant chunk of student opinions needs to be done, and it is refreshing the senate is aware of that.

The Student Senate and others involved must exhaust all avenues to garner more opinions, but it is too bad the decision on whether the fee is passed may not reflect the majority of the student body opinion.