Wednesday night, the student group MEChA addressed the issue of viewpoint-neutrality in Student Services Finance Committee eligibility decisions before the Student Judiciary Committee.
University of Wisconsin student Joe Laskowski, who represented MEChA at the hearing, not only asserted that SSFC’s determination to deny MEChA eligibility was in direct violation of viewpoint-neutrality, he also demanded that committee members Ryan Nichols, Mark Baumgardner and chair Roman Patzner be removed from their positions.
“The SSFC erroneously selected not to fund this student group through faulty procedures,” Laskowski said. “A select number of members on the board knowingly violated viewpoint-neutrality.”
To be viewpoint-neutral, a decision must be reached by closely evaluating a set of criteria and not factoring in one’s own personal emotions or ideas about a group. Laskowski cited several examples he felt demonstrated that members took their own opinions of the group into account in their decision to deny eligibility.
One example Laskowski pointed to in his argument was a recording of SSFC member Drew Horn saying he considered a controversial poem called “Fuck the White Boy” published in one of MEChA’s newsletters a reason to vote against the group’s eligibility.
“That’s a viewpoint,” Laskowski said. “[Horn] is not supposed to take into account how he feels about the organization or if he agrees with its point of view.”
Laskowski said Baumgardner made a similar mistake in calling MEChA “racist and exclusionary” in his remarks regarding his denial of the eligibility.
UW student Angela Frozena, who represented Patzner, Nichols and Baumgardner, said the determination of a group’s welcoming atmosphere was very relevant to their final decisions.
“Part of a group’s criteria for eligibility is whether or not the organization is open and receptive,” Frozena said. “That’s not a violation of viewpoint-neutrality.”
Nick Pongratz from the Collegians for a Constructive Tomorrow, a group whose eligibility was verified at a recent SSFC meeting, spoke on behalf of the members’ character.
“The defendants were very professional,” he said. “Removing them would set a precedent in which any group could remove members when they didn’t agree with the members’ decisions. MEChA sounds like it has a personal vendetta.”
The two sides also debated whether MEChA violated Associated Students of Madison bylaws by actively recruiting students to the university.
Frozena said a MEChA representative verified that recruitment was part of the group’s goals; outreach to minority students is listed in the group’s description on the MEChA website. According to Frozena, this practice constitutes a valid and neutral reason to deny eligibility.
Multicultural Student Coalition executive team member Theresa Vidaurri pointed out that the recruitment efforts of MEChA are funded by the university admissions office and not by student segregated fees.
“If MEChA isn’t using student money on recruitment, then this is not even an issue,” Laskowski said.
He asked the judges to remove the defendants from their positions and require retrials for all groups denied or granted eligibility this year. He said their lack of viewpoint-neutrality makes all decisions suspect.
“The removal of these people from SSFC is crucial,” Laskowski said. “What if they’ve done this to other groups? SSFC needs new people to make new decisions. [The defendants] are providing a disservice to the students of the university.”
Frozena said the future of SSFC’s ability to properly do its job is at stake if the defendants are removed from their positions.
“A decision like that indicates that you can only be viewpoint-neutral if you vote yes,” said Frozena. “This is a dangerous precedent to set.”
The defendants did their best to make difficult decisions in a way that would most benefit students and make the most of student money, said Frozena.
“These decisions were made with the utmost integrity,” Frozena said. “They have tried to ensure fairness to the student body.”
