Wiley’s MEChA decision makes perfect sense

by Josh Orton, Guest Columnist

So here we go again. After two eligibility hearings, El Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan, or MEChA, was deemed ineligible for student segregated fees. Rejected on appeal by the student council, MEChA was accused of using its past funding improperly to recruit potential students in violation of UW System financial policies. So, the student council correctly denied them eligibility, but in walks Big Brother Wiley with his magic funding wand. He singlehandedly sets dangerous precedent by voiding legitimate, autonomous student-government decisions, further rendering ASM an impotent student body, right?

Don’t believe the hype.

First, despite the stumping that claims Wiley’s actions hurt ASM and proved the seg-fee funding system illegitimate, the reverse proves true.

In fact, what Wiley did was accept a legitimate appeal from MEChA to examine the decision student council made. On close consideration of its work, he saw what anyone with glasses and an ounce of unbiased perspective could: that student council had flubbed MEChA’s eligibility hearing by manufacturing a false interpretation of GAP 15, the university-system policy it claimed MEChA violated. In a nutshell, the council members decided to define for themselves what constitutes a violation, and the definition they manufactured was weak. Despite advice to the contrary, members of council insisted, publicly, that they had every right to interpret university-system policy any way they wanted to.

But on any appeal, like this one, a decision based on thin, careless reasoning is likely to be overturned. Crucial members on council voted (on a sharply divided decision and after hours of haggling) that because representatives of MEChA admitted to speaking to high school students at a conference, they violated GAP 15 by engaging in recruiting activities and were therefore ineligible for funding. No other reasons for denial were listed. Last fall, the 7th Circuit Court of Appeals stated that an appeal by an organization constitutes a legitimate, albeit rare way to issue a check on student-government decisions, to ensure that those decisions were viewpoint-neutral and based on fact, not bias. In this case, the student government’s decision wasn’t based on fact; the council didn’t do its homework and manufactured its own definitions.

Wiley overturned the council’s hollow decision: “GAP 15 pertains solely to institutionally sanctioned recruitment and retention, and does not encompass any unilateral — albeit complementary — efforts that MEChA might have been pursuing.”

Secondly, and most notably, both the specious reasoning on council and the claims that Wiley’s decisions undermine student-government authority have come from the same camp of students — a group that would rather there be no ASM at all.

I’m certainly not claiming that this group of “activist conservatives” planned the charade from the get-go (“If we ignore logic now, it will crumble the system from the inside later”), as such an action would require more political foresight and cleverness than I believe this group is capable of. In any case, they’re at best inconsistent: just last year, groups, including The Badger Herald, championed Wiley for recommending cuts when some felt student government was overspending. This year, it’s becoming clearer that the same anti-ASM groups are themselves unknowingly creating another litmus test for our constitutional system of student funding. And as the MEChA case has shown, bias toward a group draped in faulty logic doesn’t stand and will be overturned, as the 7th Circuit stated.

Why would a group of students dedicate so much time, not to improving student government, but to tearing it down? Many would claim that they’re trying to save student fees, but such a marginal savings in proportion to not only the incomparably high benefits of the spent money, but also the colossal effort some have put into saving it seems to rule out such a motivation. Organizations like MEChA, after all, receive only a minute fraction of all the money SSFC allocates. The majority goes to organizations like University Health Services. So why try to banish ASM and multicultural organizations like El Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan?

I haven’t come to a final conclusion myself, but my suspicion is that many don’t like the fact that, despite its constitutionality and clear educational benefit, our student-controlled speech forum allocates money to organizations that are radical, sexual, confrontational, and intimidating. From where I stand, that’s what college means. Besides, I can assure you, really, that the members of MEChA are all actually very nice people.

Josh Orton ([email protected]) sits on both the Health Care Advisory Committee and the SSFC. He is a junior majoring in political science and integrated liberal studies.