Sometimes it seems like some Ramaz clubs have more presidents than members, which begs the question: if everyone is in charge, is anyone in charge? Certain clubs at Ramaz have as many as five or six captains. I understand that seniors want to be the president of their respective clubs, and it’s noble that Ramaz tries to accommodate so many worthy students, but the school should restrict how many presidents a club can have. If you asked the average Ramaz student why Mount Rushmore has four presidents, most would answer “because they’re all seniors right now.” 

I support clubs having multiple presidents, but some kind of limit seems sensible. To quote a noted scholar on hierarchical and bureaucratic structures, rapper Young Thug, “How can they call themselves bosses, when they got so many bosses? I would like to propose making a rule that sets the maximum number of presidents a club can have based on the number of members in that club. For example, a club can only have one president for every ten members it has in a given year. This way, club members will be incentivized to recruit participants to their club so they will have a better chance of being the club president. The best way to recruit students to your team or club is to produce a quality product. My proposal would hopefully lead to increased focus on improving the quality and benefits of our various clubs. Having a system like this also gives faculty advisors and students who are involved an opportunity to see which members have done the most to attract students and are therefore deserving of a leadership position. 

It is also important to have some kind of limit on the number of presidents in order to make sure leadership is motivated and engaged. We’re all familiar with the problem of sending an email to multiple people. If you send an email to one person, the recipient knows it’s on them to respond. If you send an email to two people, they’re each likely to hope the other will take care of it, and neither may. It’s the same with a minyan. Having a community of ten men is better for getting a minyan than having a community of eleven. Similarly, if every senior in a club becomes president it creates a twofold problem: (1) there is little motivation to be involved beforehand because a leadership position is essentially a right upon becoming a senior. (2) No one takes ownership of club activities, with everyone looking at someone else. All students should be motivated to be constantly involved in, and recruiting for, their clubs. 

A president’s involvement affects the club member’s involvement. When the president is involved and worked hard to get to their position in the club they will feel more accomplished and be more respected by others. The title of “president” should mean something. I’m resisting all urges here to say “Make Presidents Great Again,” but, ugh, too late.