Last week, the Associated Students of Madison (ASM) passed a resolution opposing a proposed amendment to the Wisconsin state constitution banning gay marriage. Following its passage, the bold actions of UW’s governing council fell under immediate scrutiny by those who saw the resolution as meaningless and wasteful. Many of those who denounced the actions of ASM misinterpret their motives and fail to realize the consequences that would result if the amendment were passed through the state legislature.
The initiative criticizing a gay-marriage ban was not the actions of a few rogue students (as some would want you to believe) but a joint decision between the Academic Staff Assembly, the Faculty Senate and ASM. In light of Chancellor Wiley’s refusal to speak out against the amendment, faculty and staff representatives, who then contacted ASM for their input, initially drafted resolutions condemning the statewide referendum. The motivation behind these resolutions, as was reiterated by both ASM Secretary Adam Schlicht and Academic Staff Assemblyman Dana Alder, was not the notion of the amendment’s moral implications but its possible backlash on the university.
ASM and the faculty government are not opposing the gay-marriage ban, claiming that all students and staff support homosexual matrimony, but that regardless of people’s stances on the issue, there is little doubt that a state amendment banning same-sex marriages, including civil unions, threatens to have a direct and perverse impact on many state parties, including the UW. As Representative Alder told me, “UW is a community … [The gay-marriage ban] is a community issue, and we have a right and a responsibility to respond.”
It is not just the capacity, but also the duty, of our student government to lobby and legislate issues, whether university, city or state, that could potentially affect the student body. ASM’s jurisdiction goes beyond university policies and issues because the concerns of UW students go beyond university policies and issues. Deliberate and blatant discrimination is just one of many negative repercussions that would result from the proposed amendment; it threatens to diminish the educational and social value of this institution.
Last week, the Regents justified raising administrative salaries at the expense of increasing tuition costs because, as they argued, pay raises were “necessary for the university to stay competitive.” How is UW, one of the most prestigious state institutions in the nation, going to stay competitive if Wisconsin, both financially and socially, becomes an unfavorable state for certain people to live and work?
The university’s appeal threatens to be diminished not just among the gay community; if we fail to promote a climate of acceptance and tolerance, UW will no longer be a shining beacon to which the academic elite will wish to flock. We would compromise opportunities to recruit and retain diverse and distinctive faculty, as well as talented undergraduate and graduate students, which would drastically deteriorate the overall quality of students’ education.
According to the Journal of Higher Education, research has shown that diverse educational settings enhance the intellectual development, active thinking and problem-solving skills of students. This school prides itself on illustrious diversity and equal opportunity, but a state law that shuns and isolates one group of people could jeopardize UW’s academic standing and erode the university’s educational foundation.
Though ASM has passed controversial, wasteful resolutions in the past, all students, if guided by collective concern and not personal belief, should realize that the state proposal threatens our education, and the actions of our governing council were just and necessary. It is impossible to know whether these actions will have any sort of effect on the referendum’s passage. But the very notion that students should remain silent on any non-university issue is the very reason that administrators and state legislators believe they can conduct their business with little regard for students’ interests.
It is why the Regents deem it just to pad the pockets of already well-compensated officials while ignoring the wishes of the students who will be forced to endure extra jobs just to pay for the salary raises from the depths of their deteriorating bank accounts. It is why state and university officials did not hesitate to raise tuition a ridiculous 35 percent during the past two years. It is why, when considering future budget cuts, leading to increased student fees and fewer class options, state legislators have done little to explore or adhere to the requests of the student body.
To say that student representatives should stay quiet on an issue that threatens our wellbeing is to feed the pessimistic apathy that has caused students to be taken advantage of for far too long.
Adam Lichtenheld ([email protected]) is a freshman majoring in political science and international studies. He is a member of ASM’s Committee on Student Policies.
