It’s hardly a revelation that something is wrong with the office of the vice president of multicultural affairs.

Over the last four years, few semesters have passed without the need to vet the the position or its occupant. VPMAs have walked in and out of the office’s revolving door as quickly as it seems some in the community are now ready to shut the door entirely. Benevolently conceived to inspire diversity, the position has, over time, proved disappointing.

So, we need change. That change, however, should in no way involve the abolishment of the VPMA, as called for in an amendment to the Student Association constitution waiting to be voted on Monday by the Assembly (see Page 1).

Several Assembly members spoke yesterday in favor of allowing democracy to take its course, to push the amendment through and bring it to a vote of the undergrads. Those Assembly members should dismount their high horses — there is no political valiance to be found in passing this decision on to a campus-wide vote. It’s the Assembly’s job to represent the voice of the people and follow bylaws, but to also be decisive and prudent.

Assembly members on Monday should consider the amendment’s origin. For starters, it was drafted by someone who works for — no, runs — an organization, the Binghamton Review, that has expressed views in direct contradiction to what the VPMA’s office hopes to accomplish, views that are often prejudiced. Though Adam Shamah asks that his affiliations outside of the Assembly be discounted, it is unreasonable to not thoroughly consider the source of the proposed amendment and his potential motives. This campus does not operate in a vacuum.

Most important, however, is that benevolence with which the VPMA’s office was conceived. The VPMA has the potential to help unite corners of this campus that are still all too insular. The office itself needs better structuring, and those groups which serve as the VPMA’s constituents need to increase their efforts to embrace the community at large.

Just think: if the same efforts put toward the VPMA’s dismantling could be put toward examining ways to improve the office, we might not need have this discussion again.

What’s gained by eliminating the VPMA, the salary of Maryam Belly and her assistants back into the larger Student Association’s pot?

Let’s not kid ourselves: that our leadership is discussing eliminating a position meant to strengthen the community is precisely a frivolous endeavor. If the Assembly passes the vote on to the student body, we believe this campus is intelligent enough to maintain the VPMA’s presence.

If the Assembly ended this discussion by voting it down on Monday — now that would truly be a revelation.