Here it comes: another boring column about segregated fees.
If you are trying to pass the time in class right now, just skip this column and go do a crossword puzzle. When your class gets over, hit a happening happy hour special at your favorite tavern, put a few down and then come back to this piece of literature. The one thing I have learned about ASM, segregated fees and campus politics is that you shouldn’t even bother with them unless you are under the influence.
I have diagnosed myself a sinister cynic and proverbial pessimist. But how can anyone not become cynical and pessimistic when you consider that four years ago, as a freshman, my portion of allocable student fees could barely buy me a six-pack, and today this same portion can buy two half-barrels? Your roommate’s portion will almost cover the deposit on the tapper, the tub and even a couple of bags of ice.
Segregated fees are easy enough to ignore if you just put them out of your mind and let daddy pay them for you, but when you consider the opportunity costs, it is enough to make grown alumni cry.
And now, after years and years of skyrocketing seg fee growth, SSFC comes to the rescue with their ruling that the mainstay MEChA and relative newcomer Diversity Education Specialists are ineligible to receive funding in 2003.
It is unfortunate that the first groups SSFC declared ineligible had to be groups that focused on student-of-color issues. However, this week’s historic eligibility decisions were not statements about campus climate made by a group of racist Ku Klux Klanners from Langdon Street. Rather, they made a statement loud and clear to student organizations to follow the rules.
This year, SSFC will no longer turn a blind eye as student organizations twist the spirit of university policy papers, nor will they tolerate blatant disregard of bylaws and procedures. The end no longer justifies the means, a paradigm never seen at SSFC meetings since the creation of ASM.
Contrary to what the interested and invested parties may want you to believe, the accusations brought against DES and MEChA were nothing new. SSFC members and others have raised concerns about student-organization eligibility for years with their peers and with university administrators. But those peers never acted, and administrators showed no interest in shaking up a system that wasn’t causing them many headaches.
Student organizations never really had to address the issues of accountability and their violations of system policy. They had the votes they needed, so why bother assembling an elaborate defense?
Now, before I get too far into the history lecture, you better finish that pint and get a couple two-for-one rail mixers.
The move made by SSFC was important, but the list of student organizations that have failed to follow university guidelines while spending students’ money is much longer than two. SSFC still has a lot of work left to do in order to apply its new standards of accountability to all student groups.
One chronic abuser comes to my mind: ASM. This group is the major abuser of segregated fees and university policies, but the abuses are hidden under the guise of student-government activities.
From poorly used travel budgets to special interest lobbying, ASM’s abuses are well documented. What a welcome move it would be on SSFC’s part to hold ASM’s eligibility to the same rigorous standards they have applied to MEChA and DES. Oh, what I wouldn’t give to see all those up-and-coming politicos told to shape up or shut down.
I realize my pessimism has quickly turned into irrational exuberance, so to prevent my bubble from completely bursting, let me slow things down a little bit. Before you all get carried away with two more long islands, let me remind you there is a long road ahead for SSFC. The real test is yet to come.
The past week’s decisions were a tremendous first step, but the framework of ASM is designed to prevent SSFC’s decisions from becoming policy.
The ASM constitution and bylaws were written with student organizations and their unobstructed access to student fees in mind. After the Supreme Court upheld UW’s morally bankrupt financing scheme, citing its apparent “viewpoint neutrality,” ASM responded with ambiguous rules designed to give every group anything it wanted. ASM’s logic was sound: If nobody is ever denied funding, there will never be any complaints of viewpoint discrimination.
If only ASM knew then what would hit the fan this week.
So let the appeals process begin. There is a lot of money at stake here. The problem is that the only entities with anything to loose are the organizations that panhandle for segregated fees. When the meetings get longer and more frequent, and the insults get louder, all sane SSFC members will ask themselves: What are we fighting for? Is it worth this misery to save students a few bucks? Do the students we are doing this for even care?
The answer to that last question is unequivocally “no, they do not care.” If you don’t believe me, then why did you just go back to the bar and order an Absolute Caucasian? The average student will never really appreciate SSFC or their bold decisions this week. So why go on? Altruism, I guess, but I can offer little more motivation than that.
Student governments come and go, but one thing remains the same: Next year’s invoice will be larger than last year’s. This year’s SSFC should be remembered for their bravery in the face of hostility, but, alas, when the well-funded machinery of these student organizations gets rolling, they will get their way.
I hope I am wrong. It could be the alcohol talking, but even this pessimist has to admit the events of the past week prove anything is possible.
— A.J. Hughes ([email protected]) is a software developer and a former UW student.