The second time, traditionally, hasn't been the charm. As far as this spring's living wage referendum is concerned, we hope the old adage holds.

After its fall effort at eliminating student control of segregated fees failed, the Student Labor Action Coalition (SLAC) is back. Unlike last time around, the organization appears to have garnered sufficient petition signatures to place a referendum on the ballot in ASM's spring election next week. The measure seeks to impose a living wage standard of over $10 per hour for employees at campus Union and recreational sports facilities, which will inevitably lead toward higher segregated fees.

SLAC's loopy logic prompts us to offer this simple bit of advice: vote "No."

While the imposition of a living wage seems noble in the abstract, its implications need to be considered. Do students scooping Babcock Ice Cream at Memorial Union need a living wage? Does the student swiping IDs at the SERF deserve a wage hike?

Most importantly, should all students be forced to shoulder an even higher segregated fee burden in the wake of massive tuition hikes? They should not.

SLAC, high on its own questionable ideology, fails to see that its altruism for a select few will also harm every student on campus on a different level. We fail to see this referendum as anything other than an extension of SLAC's typical tomfoolery, a modus operandi based more on sophomoric stunts than substance.

Furthermore, the student judiciary struck down last fall's measure, which raises questions of how the current referendum — it's seemingly identical twin, could possibly pass muster under case law.

Vote "No" — your tuition and fees are high enough already.