Vibrant, exciting, thought-provoking — all ideas I associate with my experience here a UW-Madison. Coming from a rural background in the state of Wisconsin, I marvel at the fact that life in Madison thrives on debate. I’ve experienced more life in my two years here than in the previous eighteen I spent in the outskirts of Fond du Lac, Wis. I can only attribute that to the atmosphere that I am in today.

As a first-semester freshman, I got involved with the grassroots organizing part of the Associated Students of Madison, our student government, not expecting the impact it would have on me. I initially became involved because I thought that ASM would help me build the organizational and public lifestyle skills that would be advantageous to a future teacher.

To continue these skills, I coordinated the non-partisan Vote 2002 Coalition this past fall which involved a debate, a website, a voter guide and more. Most importantly, I was able to work with nearly two-dozen student organizations and see a portion of the incredible viewpoints and ideas that abound on this campus.

The funny thing is that next year these organizations might not be supported. Why? Because many of the student organizations I worked with are funded by segregated fees, and our current fee system is under attack, my friends.

What is so wrong with our current segregated-fee system? This university offers the opportunity for any Tom, Dick or Sally to partake in a long list of activities while also providing the opportunity to think of their own programs and share their own points of view. Under the current fee system, a real debate is able to take place and reflect the continuum of ideas emanating from UW-Madison as well as the world beyond. We are not constrained by the majority voice because our fee system allows for all voices to be heard. A full diversity of viewpoints can be tasted and re-tasted at will, regardless of opinion or ideology.

The proposed opt-out system claims to offer these (nearly) same benefits and also give students direct control of the funding decisions. While this makes a good sound bite, one has to look deeper. The arguments for the opt-out system don’t have the substance to answer the hard questions. How will this system really affect the open debate of ideas on campus? Do we really want to limit or eliminate the ideas this system fosters? Without knowing the full range of options, how will our educational experience be complete?

I am not ready to sacrifice the quality of our educations for this option. While the current system has its flaws, the opt-out system does not fix them; it merely limits the discussion. The debate over segregated fees has raged for ten years, however neither side has taken real leadership and resolved the issue.

I encourage the new ASM take this matter up and try to find a solution that all sides can accept. Whether this referendum passes or fails, students are the real losers if they must choose between only two “solutions” to a problem that can be solved in multiple ways, our leaders just have to put in the effort to find them.

I’m a math education major. While the educational experiences I have gained within the classroom will have a strong affect on how I will spend the rest of my life, I firmly believe that all students draw just as much if not more from their experiences outside of the classroom. Colleges want “well-rounded” students to apply — there must be a reason.

I want my students some day to be able to be independent thinkers, people that challenge their beliefs and in doing so become stronger individuals. This is exactly the opportunity offered at this university that has unparalleled amounts of student choice and input in nearly all aspects of our education.

Anita Bertram is a sophomore majoring in secondary mathematics education. She was recently appointed as a School of Education Representative and is seeking election for the next session.