The Badger Herald

OPINION & EDITORIAL

SSFC bends rules, sets poor example

Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.

Also by Jeff Carnes:

Gay frat diversifies Greeks (May 4, 2007)
Problems in city's environment vast (April 26, 2007)
State budget must keep UW in mind (April 19, 2007)
Students should take responsiblity for credit card debts (April 12, 2007)
State must confront brain drain issue (March 29, 2007)

by Jeff Carnes

Thursday, November 30, 2006

When the American Indian group Wunk Sheek submitted their budget, which totaled $94,094 through 2008, to the Student Services Finance Committee this fall, there were several problems. There were numerical errors and, in addition, Wunk Sheek did not meet with an SSFC financial advisor prior to submitting their budget in accordance with SSFC policy. As a result, SSFC allocated only the minimum $4,750 in funding for the group. However, SSFC repealed their initial ruling Nov. 10 and instead recommended that Wunk Sheek receive full funding.

The ruling by SSFC was not unanimous. Some members of SSFC considered the initial ruling too harsh, but others stood by the initial ruling because, while tragic, Wunk Sheek did not follow the guidelines in order to receive funding.

Following the Wunk Sheek controversy, SSFC yet again decided to not adhere to policy, though this time it was provoked by University of Wisconsin Chancellor John Wiley. Mr. Wiley sent SSFC a letter requesting a reconsideration of funding for six organizations that use portions of their budgets for off-campus facilities. Mr. Wiley made an exception last year so that these groups did not have to endure instant hardship, but he specified that it was only a one-year exception. SSFC is now working with these groups to rework their budgets as a result of SSFC and off-campus organizations neglecting to stick to guidance of the chancellor.

If Wunk Sheek did not receive the funding they requested in their budget, it would be unfortunate. Wunk Sheek not only reaches out to American Indians but to all students by raising awareness about the culture on campus. Both on- and off-campus organizations provide valuable services to us; part of the experience of UW is the sheer diversity of ways to get involved on campus, in the City of Madison, and beyond. Many of these groups, such as Wunk Sheek, expose us to a side of American life we know little about, or of which the information we do know is skewed or just plain wrong.

It is regrettable that these groups are in danger of losing some of their funding. When it comes to allocating money, however, there must be rules in order to ensure the money is distributed fairly among all organizations on campus and spent in accordance with SSFC guidance and state laws. As a result, all parties involved — SSFC, UW, the UW System and the student organizations themselves — have to abide by the law. SSFC has been put in the middle of many competing interests, and they will never make everyone happy as a result of their sometimes-controversial decisions. When SSFC makes exceptions and ignores recommendations from those who truly hold the purse strings, SSFC causes even more controversy.

SSFC recommended that Wunk Sheek receive $94,094 despite the group's negligence in issuing a budget that didn't meet the proper standards. If this group could not take the initiative and put together an acceptable budget, how can SSFC trust them to spend the $94,094 in accordance with SSFC guidelines? It is not a trivial amount of money — it's more money than most of our parents make in a year. Why did SSFC cave instead of pointing the finger where it belongs?

SSFC and off-campus organizations knew that Mr. Wiley would more than likely not make exceptions for their budgets this year, especially with the financial woes that the university is facing. Did they think that Mr. Wiley was not serious?

Saying "Yes" to everyone may seem like the right thing to do, but sometimes doing the right thing means being the bad guy and saying "No." When dealing with budgets and hundreds of thousands of dollars, SSFC must have the utmost integrity. SSFC has now set two precedents, and future members may have to deal with the ramifications of not following their own bylaws.

In order to be an effective governing body, SSFC needs to say "No" instead of bending its own rules and ignoring the chancellor. Being the bad guy is difficult, but it is better than being considered weak or even unfair. Trying to satisfy everyone will never work and has only resulted in SSFC sacrificing its integrity.

Jeff Carnes (jmcarnes@wisc.edu) is a senior majoring in linguistics.

Feedback

Show all comments

Hide anonymous comments

Anonymous (November 30, 2006 @ 8:46am):

So these bozos will go on to do the casino accounting someday?

Anonymous (November 30, 2006 @ 10:05am):

Did you even go to the SSFC hearing where the Wunk Sheek budget was presented? Maybe you shouldn't write on topics you know NOTHING about.

Anonymous (November 30, 2006 @ 11:47am):

Well ya know, the entire campus was once owned by the indians...

Anonymous (November 30, 2006 @ 11:53am):

Well said, the ssfc committee needs to take into consideration what is best for all students, not just be a bunch of yes men for all these student groups.

Anonymous (November 30, 2006 @ 2:19pm):

They really have a lot of garbage articles in the Badger Herald. Why do they allow people to become writers for the Herald when they don't even research the topic that they write about but take a summary of facts written down by one of their affiliates, form an opinion, then write something down?

Anonymous (November 30, 2006 @ 2:49pm):

Anti Wunk Sheek wackos are obviously and ridiculously antisemitic! There is too much hatred of various Chosen People on this weird little planet we share!