One thing every good Badger Herald employee learns when they step into our humble office is that we are, have been and will continue to be an experiment. Experimentation is the force that drives the University of Wisconsin to greatness and recognition around the world.
Although UW is often derided as overly-progressive or experimental, some institutions within the university are still highly traditional. We only need to look at our student government to see how conventional some of our practices are, even on one of the country’s most liberal public university campuses.
Although most of us have not even realized it, this campus has been engaged in a very serious discussion about the role of student government throughout the last few weeks. This conversation began mostly because of accusations the Multicultural Student Coalition made in their waiver application for segregated fee funding from the Student Services Finance Committee.
While some of the accusations in the MCSC waiver were simply ridiculous, the document does raise some serious questions about how we treat each other on this campus. Unfortunately, too much of the campus conversation about the MCSC waiver has ridiculed the group. This kind of discussion will only further alienate MCSC and groups like them, making the campus climate worse.
It’s common for white students here to criticize the document’s lack of professionalism as an automatic disqualification for MCSC from their student funds. I’ve heard other students claim that minority groups on campus are not as accustomed to professional behavior as white students on campus, since that’s “just not part of their culture.”
Both of these answers miss the point. Groups like MCSC have introduced major important initiatives that help ease some of Wisconsin’s most pressing diversity issues. But to claim professionalism is not part of a minority group’s culture ignores the mainstream success of minorities in our country since the Civil Rights Movement.
The term “segregated fees” alone is enough for us to realize that some practices on this campus are insensitive to minority groups. Wisconsin is notorious throughout the country for being one of the most segregated of all northern states; Milwaukee is commonly referred to as one of the most segregated cities in the country.
Because of this, it’s easy to see why students like those in MCSC feel marginalized when they come to UW – it’s a perpetuation of the same problems and misunderstandings they’ve dealt with before. However, groups like MCSC have repeatedly stated their distaste for the current setup in ASM and how committees like SSFC are handled.
A reasonable and balanced budget process is essential to any government. But just like how the Herald experiments with the future of journalism, it’s ASM’s responsibility to experiment with the future of effective government.
As we’ve seen throughout the last year at the Capitol, many antiquated styles of debate and governing have proved ineffective. In many ways, ASM’s traditions and standards are not a forward-thinking model of government’s potential when students take the helm several decades from now.
ASM as an institution makes noble efforts to empower students. But in some cases, the government can dissolve into groups of students emulating the processes of status quo governance only to unintentionally learn how to continue the worst traditions of our political discourse after they graduate. The most recent controversy with MCSC has exposed this.
I’ve seen the term “sifting and winnowing” used as a Twitter handle, in Facebook statuses and as a symbol of Badger pride equal to Bucky himself. But I rarely see the Wisconsin Idea actually implemented by undergraduate students in major public settings like student government.
ASM needs to get back in touch with the governing philosophy of our university and no longer be afraid of being a progressive, experimental institution. SSFC in particular has been dealt a particularly difficult hand because of a Supreme Court ruling several years ago that introduced the concept of viewpoint neutrality, a requirement that likely only worsens ASM’s relationship with groups like MCSC.
I’m not calling for any revolutionary government to take over the SAC or the Capitol. But throughout the last several years, both governments have been ineffective and polarizing. This is their own doing. But unlike Democrats and Republicans at the top of State Street, students can actually get messy and try new things.
Since I’m just a guy that sits in the Herald office, I can’t single-handedly think of ways ASM should experiment. But you, along with the campus community, can be part of a conversation about what should change in ASM. Email me and I might feature your suggestions for changes to ASM in future columns.
Ryan Rainey ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in journalism and Latin American studies.
