Well, if Student Labor Action Coalition can give Chancellor Biddy Martin a report card, this editorial board can do the same for our beloved Associated Students of Madison.
Following the colossal failure that was the “reform session” of last year, we had relatively few expectations of ASM. Although that’s not exactly a surprise — ASM has always forced us to set the bar low.
So what have they done so far? Let’s go committee by committee:
Academic Affairs: First off, let’s change the name. This is essentially the textbook committee, and if it stuck with that name, then it’d be doing a decent job. While the proliferation of the textbook swap is commendable, Academic Affairs’ resolution placed before University Committee to hold off on buying new editions of textbooks might only work in certain disciplines. We appreciate the renewed effort to tackle this problem, but perhaps this is a battle the committee might want to rethink in order to compromise with professors on cost saving solutions. C+
Legislative Affairs: Color us impressed. When Legislative Affairs Chair Adam Johnson indicated he wanted to change the course of Leg Affairs, we were skeptical. Now we’re relatively satisfied. Mr. Johnson has brought a great deal of attention not only to the need for a voting member on the Alcohol License Review Committee, but also to the possible transformations of the Mifflin Street neighborhood. While Mr. Johnson wants to tackle state issues again, we would advocate caution — pick battles you can feasibly win and don’t go it alone. The relationship between ASM and United Council and the untapped potential of Wisconsin Student Lobby are two significant paths could provide a significant strength in numbers to tackle those issues. Until then, tread lightly, LAC. B+
Diversity Committee: What’s in a name? Apparently, a lot of philosophical hang-ups. We give chair Steven Olikara credit for stepping up to the bar, but not for having drinks with UW administration and the plethora of diversity-related groups there. Consensus building is important for any campuswide venture, but spending half a year doing it better come with some results. And right now, there’s essentially nothing. Vice Provost of Diversity and Climate Damon Williams assures us something is going to come to fruition in February of next year, but until then, we find this committee to be a virtual non-entity. D
Finance Committee: Perhaps it’s because we’ve been used to Student Services Finance Committee’s regimented and strict approach to funding student groups, but Finance seems to be a little too lax for their own good. Well, lax when it comes to having a cohesive, clear set of rules for student groups. Unfortunately, it seems the only criteria for most travel or event grants is “Does it do something for the campus?” and “Can we fund half of it?” The LGBT Equality March was a dubious proposal and didn’t really bring much back to campus other than footage of the event, but they still got half of their initial request. Then came Finance’s decision to strip the Wisconsin Union Directorate of their entire World Music Festival grant because they didn’t put the ASM logo on a couple of fliers. Just when we thought this reckless behavior was over, they award Engineers Without Borders $10,000 for a trip to Rwanda with few established criteria. Merry Christmas? D
SSFC: Finally, after years of viewpoint neutrality violations, lawsuits and bizarre infighting, SSFC finally got it right. Was their denial of Campus Women’s Center unfortunate? Perhaps. Was it necessary? Absolutely. Given that Collegians For a Constructive Tomorrow, CWC and Wunk Sheek all tried to whine their way to funding, SSFC appropriately shut them down. They’ve handled the budget process well and we commend them for that. However, we do have a bone to pick with their choice to raise the salaries for Student Judiciary Chief Justice Tre Darby while lowering those for Student Elections Commission. Raising SSFC leadership salaries is also not an optimal outcome, but it’s more understandable given the number of hours they put in. We don’t enjoy raising salaries of officials who usually fail to prove their legitimacy, and we think SSFC should probably leave salaries where they lie. A-
Shared Governance: Unfortunately, Shared Governance doesn’t seem to think they belong to ASM, and as such, are nearly autonomous in their daily duties. Which is fine, considering ASM probably can’t help them achieve their goals any more than they can do on their own. The only question is what their committee appointees actually do — the rarely-updated blog for Shared Governance indicates it’s not much, but we cannot be sure. Until we get more info on what those appointees are doing on Shared Governance committee, we cannot hand a grade to this committee. Incomplete
Student Council: Unfortunately, ASM committees don’t add up to the whole of our student government. They are represented by a group of students — some dedicated, some clueless, some resum?-padders — all of them disconnected in some significant way. What have they accomplished this semester, exactly? SSFC has new powers to remove disagreeable members, we have a creative works fund and ASM supports gay rights marches. We can already hear the golf claps. Plus, the behavior of leadership has been less than pleasant — we weren’t overly enthusiastic about SLAC’s resolution regarding union workers either, but that doesn’t mean Vice Chair Tom Templeton and Secretary Kurt Gosselin should kill the motion by repeated roll calls. Furthermore, Gosselin’s singlehanded orchestration of the FY11 budget seemed to blindside several council members (and the staff member that promptly lost her job when a Gosselin amendment cut her position). Council has become inwardly focused and looks to continue that trend next semester. This is the exact reason no one pays attention to ASM — internal politics that even members of the council can’t grasp. Learn Robert’s Rules of Order and get down to some actual substantive business. I mean, did you even notice there was a move to restructure the graduate school? F
Correction: An earlier version of this article stated there had been recent budget cuts to United Council travel expenditures, but this was incorrect. The article has been changed to reflect that.
