The Associated Students of Madison is at a crossroads. ASM in its current form is an unorganized, frustrated, timid government. Meaningful communication with students is rare. Outreach is haphazard or nonexistent. Clear, unambiguous stances are elusive. There are indeed several shrewd and inspired leaders, but the institutional structure of ASM sets limits on their influence. ASM should be a powerful force for student representation — not a punch line.

It is impossible to understate the importance of the upcoming university-wide referendum considering ASM’s new drafted constitution. Jeff Wright and his constitutional committee deserve the gratitude of the entire student body. They have scrutinized every aspect of this failing government and created a blueprint for something more vital and dynamic. The new constitution imbues ASM with an institutional seriousness which it currently lacks.

The constitution is doubtlessly imperfect, and unanticipated problems will reveal themselves in the years following ratification. But the raw materials for a successful government are there: a popularly-elected president and vice president; a Cabinet of Directors appointed by the president; a Senate to confirm presidential appointments and monitor the executive. All these measures are vital for bringing organization to ASM.

By voting for the new ASM constitution this February, the University of Wisconsin could usher in a new era of student government. The consequences of defeat are substantial: If the referendum fails, ASM will return to its traditionally tepid, dysfunctional existence. Further weakening of the organization would guarantee eventual permanent dissolution.

Yet ASM has no reason to feel confident students will ratify the constitution, especially considering substantial opposition from an assortment of student organizations. Groups opposing the constitution have spent the winter recess mobilizing opposition and honing their message. ASM, in contrast, has not updated its “ASM Constitution” blog since Dec. 10.

Especially glaring is delay in publishing the bylaws that must be voted on in conjunction with the constitution. To be fair, Constitutional Committee Chair Jeff Wright has assured us the bylaws will be released a full two weeks before the vote (whenever that is). However, considering the bylaws are as important as the constitution in defining the function of any new government, their absence remains the largest question regarding the plan to revive ASM.

It would be especially ironic if the constitution failed because ASM was too disorganized to mount a serious campaign for its passage. A date for the February referendum had not even been set as of Jan. 16. We urge ASM to muster up a level of energy appropriate to what is at stake.