NEWS
Vets for Vets reclaims funding
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Nick Penzenstadler:
- For whom the bell tolls (November 29, 2007)
- New apartments for West Wash? (November 20, 2007)
- One-and-out: Kumar will not seek 2nd term on Dane County Board (November 15, 2007)
- Displaced Carroll residents call university, bookstore helpful (November 13, 2007)
- Carroll Street fire displaces students (November 12, 2007)
Related Stories:
- SSFC hears opening requests (September 21, 2004)
- Vets for Vets loses student funding (September 26, 2006)
- SSFC makes funding decisions for more student orgs. (October 28, 2001)
- Funding group shoots down earlier decision (September 29, 2006)
- SSFC grants WSUM and Vets for Vets funds (October 2, 2003)
by Nick Penzenstadler
Tuesday, October 3, 2006
In a reversal of last week's decision, Vets for Vets will now be eligible to receive funding from student-segregated fees.
After 35 years of providing advising services to University of Wisconsin student veterans and a long history of segregated-fee support, the Student Services Finance Committee stripped Vets for Vets of its segregated fee funding last week.
But Monday night the group reached a 6-3-3 decision to reinstate funding based on an appeal and a promise by Vets for Vets to change their bylaws.
According to Vets for Vets treasurer Liz O'Herrin, the group was not in accordance with an Associated Students of Madison bylaw stating all students must be able to participate as an active member of an organization in order for that group to receive funding provided by segregated fees — a varying amount of money added on to each UW student's tuition every semester.
"Primarily what we do is provide information to student veterans about their benefits; it's a very complicated process," O'Herrin said. "There are 550 student veterans on campus, there are millions of dollars that veterans can collect. It's just a matter of filling out the correct paperwork and making deadlines. We make sure everyone is on the ball."
O'Herrin said she was relieved Monday when SSFC reconsidered their decision and granted Vets for Vets funding for another two years.
"I'm very happy that they decided to grant us eligibility so we can continue what we've been doing for the last 35 years," O'Herrin said. "It was frustrating, but I think they acted by the rules that they had enforced initially."
SSFC secretary Jackie Goessel said she was satisfied with the evidence Vets for Vets provided the council at the forum to change the decision.
"I was initially worried about their openness to all students, but they have proved to me they are," Goessel said.
Some SSFC representatives raised concerns that Vets for Vets is not beneficial to the student body as a whole, but O'Herrin pointed out other student organization groups are aimed at specific groups of people on campus as well.
"We do strive to inform student veterans, but I'd argue that no other student body is equally open to all groups of people," O'Herrin said. "Veterans are just are target group."
O'Herrin also the organization provides speakers who give their personal accounts of military life to students and the media, citing it as a service they offer to all students, not just veterans.
"It's firsthand experience where so many individuals have been invited to speak," she said. "So it allows other students who are not veterans to participate in the services they provide."
SSFC representative Kyle Ripple provided a dissenting opinion to the group's funding. He said Vets for Vets' services were not open to all students because the military does not accept all applicants, citing individuals with disabilities in particular.
The group promised Monday to change their bylaws at their meeting tonight, which caused a technical hang-up for some SSFC representatives, such as Michael Kellie.
"I still feel that when you turn in an appeal with the same bylaws as initially, it's not the right way [to be granted eligibility]," he said.
SSFC Vice Chair Kellie Sanders said she hoped the group would regain funding. She said there is a direct correlation between the Vets for Vets organization and the general student body, therefore rendering the funding appropriate.
"It's a hard decision to make, to go into the armed forces," Sanders said. "And as part of that decision, [students] have to decide whether or not to continue their education."
Anonymous (October 3, 2006 @ 9:44am):
Vets for Vets help every student on campus. They fight so that you do have too.
Anonymous (October 3, 2006 @ 1:33pm):
Good decision... V for V is a great organization!
Anonymous (October 3, 2006 @ 1:37pm):
They serve vets. I cannot be a vet because of a health condition, others cannot serve because they aren't hetero. The org is important, but it should not receive my seg fee money.
Anonymous (October 3, 2006 @ 2:32pm):
Kyle Ripple: WHAT??????? Vets-For-Vets is completely seperate from the military and has no say (not a drop of influence) on their hiring policies. If you care so much about students w/ disabilities, why are criticizing an org that is 100% wheelchair accessible as you sit in the office of an organization housed in a completely inaccessible building?
Anonymous (October 3, 2006 @ 8:53pm):
In a wheelchair, enter the union from the Langdon street side on the ramp (between the staircases). Use the automatic doors (to the left) and turn left inside the doors. Go to main elevator. Go up to the fifth floor. Turn right out of the elevator. Enter ASM offices. Run by me again how the building is not accessable?
Anonymous (October 18, 2006 @ 1:15pm):
It is true Vets for Vets has no influence on the hiring policies of the military. But Vets for Vets requires members to be veterans. The military's hiring policies are indirectly a part of their organization, thus membership is limited to those individuals that meet the military's standards. Kyle Ripple's argument is rational and he is correct to vote against Vets for Vets eligibility.
