Opinion

United Council overlooks representation for all

Looking for a print version?
Simply use your browser’s ‘Print’ command and a printer-friendly document will be generated automatically.

Related stories:

• Oops (April 17, 2002)
• SJ should reconsider appointment (November 17, 2005)
• District 5 endorsement (April 1, 2003)
• United Council: What $1.35 buys you (April 8, 2003)
• United Council vital to serving students (April 5, 2005)

Also by Badger Herald Editorial Board:

• The Invisible Man Award: Wyndham Manning (May 7, 2009)
• The People's Choice Award: Jacqueline Hitchon et. al (May 7, 2009)
• The Lifetime Achievement Award: ASM (May 7, 2009)
• Honest representation (May 5, 2009)
• Junger for ASM Chair (May 5, 2009)

Sharing tools:

E-mail this article:

Your e-mail address:

Recipient e-mail address:

Optional message:

Share on:

• Facebook
• Digg
• Newsvine
• reddit
• StumbleUpon
• delicious
• Google
• Yahoo! My Web
• BlogMarks
• Linkroll
• Simpy

• Spurl
• Connotea
• Fark
• Feed Me Links

• Magnolia
• BlinkList
• Sphere
• LinkedIn

• Furl
• Technorati
• AddToAny
• Permalink

 

Last weekend, United Council, the statewide coalition of student government, forbade the Student Government Association of UW-Stevens Point from casting one of its eight votes on the council because the Stevens Point delegation did not meet the UC’s “diversity credentials.”

These “diversity credentials” (a euphemism for the more accurate, though less legal term “quota”) are meant to ensure that the student governments that participate in UC give a voice to frequently underrepresented groups by requiring two women (one of which must be a woman of color), one student of color, one LGBT student, and one “traditionally underrepresented” student are part of each school’s delegation.

Assumedly, the quota system employed by UC is intended to encourage student council groups to fully represent the student bodies they advocate. The UC says its “diversity credential” system, which has been in place for 15 years, is intended to “ensure the spirit of shared governance is present within the United Council.”

But how can taking votes away from a delegation contribute to shared governance? Unfortunately, while UC is trying to give underrepresented students a voice, they are only ensuring hundreds of students lose theirs.

Moreover, quota systems like the one employed by UC have been rejected time and time again by courts and the public at both the state and national level.

But this quota system is wrong not just because the students of Stevens Point are denied a voice, or because it is illegal. Rather, its punitive nature serves to divide and differentiate students based on gender, race and sexual orientation. We agree diversity is essential, and it is important all groups have a voice, but such a rigid system heightens divisions without breaking down stereotypes and highlighting the concern we all share as students.

The purpose of diversity is to learn about and respect each other. We encourage UW-Stevens Point’s student government to increase its diversity, but we still care what they say.

Unfortunately, such a punitive law suggests UC doesn’t.