When deciding whom to endorse for Undergraduate Students Association Council, the Daily Bruin Editorial Board focused on what candidates can do for students, regardless of the candidate’s slate. This board hopes voters do the same and evaluate candidates on what they can do for UCLA as a whole, not just for specific groups.
USAC represents every student and is supported financially by every student at UCLA. And, with improving voter turnout in the elections ““ last year’s elections had a 38.9 percent turnout ““ we hope more students continue to see the value in these elections and how they can impact our lives at UCLA.
USAC is responsible for major campus events such as Bruin Bash and the Annual JazzReggae Festival, student advocacy efforts, more than $3 million in student fees, and much more. This week’s elections represent a valuable opportunity for students to voice their opinions on who should be leading these efforts.
To choose which candidates to endorse, the editorial board conducted one-on-one interviews with the candidates, attended the student group endorsement hearings, and reviewed each candidate individually. Endorsements represent the majority opinion of the board.
The my.ucla.edu voting will ask you to rank your choices for each office. Votes are redistributed to eliminate runoff elections. Accordingly, we have ranked our endorsements for each position.
PRESIDENT: LUZ MARIA KUMPEL (Bruins United)
Kumpel’s narrow platform will allow her to focus on president’s most pressing job: unifying USAC
There was great discussion and consideration of both candidates for the Undergraduate Students Association Council president. This board endorses Luz Maria Kumpel, the Bruins United candidate.
Both candidates presented wide varieties of experience, but this board was concerned with either’s ability to bring what is needed for USAC right now: unity.
The office of the president can work in many ways to reach out to the community, rally the student body and serve the needs of undergraduates at UCLA.
But the primary responsibility of the president lies in her ability to unify the council and lead USAC to effectively enact what is needed for students.
This board wants to see a leader willing to extend beyond the bounds of her slate and bring action to the forefront of the council, especially given USAC’s difficulties functioning as a unified body this past year.
This is not to say we cringe at a candidate’s plans to make the office of the president outreach-oriented.
But given USAC’s pressing need of coming together as a decision-making body, we believe Kumpel is the leader USAC needs right now.
Students First! candidate Jasmine Hill by no means lacks experience or a progressive platform for USAC.
We are particularly encouraged by her dynamism and history of leadership at UCLA as chief of staff under current USAC President Cinthia Flores and retention coordinator of the Afrikan Student Union.
But her focus lies too much outside of the bounds of her duties as a unifier.
Kumpel has a narrower platform than Hill, but a similar energy, enthusiasm and grassroots approach.
What’s more, she brings the vision of bipartisanship needed for the position of president, and this board is confident in her ability to lead board meetings and execute projects in a productive manner.
Despite her commitment as a resident assistant next year, we are certain of her ability to prioritize and bring the needs of USAC to the forefront of her activities.
Hill’s focus on bringing in more duties for her office to enact further demonstrates to this board her likelihood to make the office of the president just another office rather than a point of unity.
The reality of USAC is, however, that the president is not just another arm extending from the body.
The president is the head, the president is the unifier, the president is the listener. USAC can do more, but from its other arms, from its other offices.
Hill’s plans to facilitate discussion on the UC Board of Regents, to make UCLA more affordable with scholarships for students who engage in community service, to bring more alumni to the campus, and to increase campus safety can all be accomplished through more specialized offices than that of the president.
Kumpel prioritizes reaching out to student groups and making the USAC president a leader for this campus. She understands the need for this office to be more transparent and serve not just the needs of a few student groups, but all 26,687 undergraduates.
Hill’s experience and emphasis on student advocacy are certainly important goals. We hope USAC will carry out those tasks, but through the appropriate channels.
We are confident in Kumpel’s ability to leave slate politics at the door and manage a unified and diplomatic student government ““ something that this year’s council lacked.
EXTERNAL VICE PRESIDENT: CHRIS SANTOS (Students First!)
Santos’ experience in fighting fee increases, increasing diversity makes him a good choice
This board is confident that Students First! candidate Christopher Santos is the best person to lead the external vice president’s office next year.
Given his prior experience in the EVP office, his involvement as the Undergraduate Affairs Committee chair on the UC Student Association Board of Directors, and his successful lobbying efforts, Santos has demonstrated that he has the knowledge and experience necessary to advocate on behalf of students to the UC Board of Regents and the California Legislature.
The driving force behind his platform is the fight against fee increases and legislation that threatens diversity on this campus and throughout the UC system ““ and he has already been successful on this front. As the campus organizing director for the EVP office this year, Santos was deeply involved in efforts to pass student aid reform, and he has been a particularly vocal advocate for AB 540 students.
Santos was also an active participant in this year’s student- and faculty-led walkout, protests against student fee hikes during the November regents meeting, and the UC-wide protests in March. He has a clear and demonstrable commitment to protecting higher education.
Next year, he plans to work with state officials to protect students from another fee increase, seek out alternative affordability options, and work on finding new sources of revenue for higher education.
Santos’ legacy of activism and his extensive knowledge of local, statewide and national issues that affect students, as well as the relationships he already has with campus and statewide officials, make him an excellent candidate for external vice president.
INTERNAL VICE PRESIDENT: STEPHANIE LUCAS (Bruins United)
Lucas plans to improve students’ access to resources by creating how-to guide for groups
Stephanie Lucas presents a reasonable and straightforward platform that includes plans to increase the number of podcasted classes, digitize the student test bank and create a “how-to” guide for student groups that delineates how to access available resources. She also aims to increase dialogue on diversity among students.
Lucas impressed this editorial board with her professionalism and ability to articulately explain her goals. Her platform indicates an understanding of one of USAC’s primary functions: to serve as an intermediary between the bureaucracy of the university and the ideas of the students.
With great clarity, Lucas repeatedly referred to her “˜how-to’ guide for student groups, a program that will aggregate and disseminate all information relevant to student groups, including deadlines, how to arrange venues for events, and advice on how to plan publicity.
Lucas said the guide will create an efficient, streamlined way for student groups to increase their presence on campus and take advantage of the myriad resources available to them.
She has also spearheaded programs such as Strathmore Safe Rides, which she promises to continue.
Lucas has said that she does not believe that it is USAC’s place to issue opinions and resolutions on geopolitical issues on behalf of the campus, and she rightfully acknowledges that UCLA’s student body consists of a wide range of values and backgrounds that cannot be fully represented within the council.
This board firmly agrees with that perspective. Drafting resolutions on geopolitical issues accomplishes nothing beyond stirring up controversy and creating even greater ideological divides between councilmembers and members of the campus at large.
While Ramielyn Milo also has goals to facilitate student groups and aid diversity efforts on campus, her plans are not as straightforward as Lucas’ idea to create a guide.
Lucas began her own student group, has worked in the IVP office before, and even worked for Homaira Hosseini, the 2008-2009 USAC president. Lucas is the best choice for the position of internal vice president, and we think her goals are extremely reasonable in scope.
GENERAL REPRESENTATIVES: EMILY RESNICK, CARL BETZLER, RAIYAAN SERANG
Candidates plan to improve student gym, wireless network, form potential business minor
1. Emily Resnick has one of the most realistic platforms of any candidate this year.
She has plans that will address some of the most common student complaints of inefficiency, namely the oft-overcrowded Wooden Center, and plans that will bring more healthy and environmentally and socially conscious food options to campus.
What’s more, she has received support from contacts at the Wooden Center on her plans to establish a Web-based gym attendance tally and has spoken to members of the students’ association board of directors regarding the healthy food improvements.
2. Carl Betzler is the single candidate running for USAC who is interested in making UCLA academics a top priority next year.
Betzler is coming off a year spent working as General Representative 2 Addison Huddy’s chief of staff and has experience working in the office of the president under the last two USAC presidents.
Betzler wants to continue the Bruins United crusade for a business minor at UCLA, and he has laid out more specific plans with a realistic timetable for the achievement of that goal.
He has also planned to couple academic expansion with more specified vocational and graduate-preparatory programs, including alumnus-led career workshops and graduate school application review sessions.
Betzler also has plans that could finally bring about a new climate in terms of UCLA student service. His goal of establishing an incentive-based volunteer program could breathe life into UCLA’s new but struggling volunteer center.
3. Raiyaan Serang presented a four-prong platform that included a commitment to unity within the UCLA community through pride and student-recognition events, the desire to improve campus resources particularly through a more streamlined MyUCLA website, increased Career Center resources and workshops on the Hill, and an enhanced wireless network throughout campus.
It is the final prong of his platform that most excites this editorial board and wins him our endorsement.
Serang has done his research and has met with UCLA personnel who helped supplement his educational and extracurricular background in electrical engineering. Serang demonstrated knowledge of how UCLA’s multiple wireless signals conflict to create “dark spots” on campus with no wireless connectivity. Serang plans to work with UCLA technology experts to unify all of campus wireless under one signal, which he says will lower costs and eliminate dark spots.
Serang was an articulate candidate who provided detailed factual and anecdotal examples, drawing on his personal passions and experience to execute his platform. We believe Serang presented ideas of reasonable scope and real possibility of implementation.
The remaining five candidates either suffered from a lack of focus in their platforms or exhibited ill-conceived vision regarding their roles as future general representatives.
For example, we applaud Gatsby Miller’s vision to promote diversity, but we question the efficacy of inviting celebrity speakers to campus as a means to encourage conversation within a diverse student community.
Nora Cisneros showed great knowledge, zeal and eloquence when it came to defending affirmative action. However, considering the legislative roadblocks to statewide implementation, we doubt that the role of USAC general representative can make affirmative action a reality.
Matt Spring spoke of increasing accessibility and promoting social justice, which are admittedly admirable goals. However, other candidates have more concrete ideas in approaching these same issues, which makes us question his potential effectiveness as a member of the council.
We found Taylor Braun’s promise to increase study locations on campus to have merit. But coupled with ideas like advocating gender-neutral bathrooms ““ an idea narrow in scope ““ and lowering the cost of fair-trade products on campus ““ which appears fundamentally paradoxical ““ we were not convinced that her platform as a whole met the needs of all students and could be effectively implemented.
Jose Valenzuela’s enthusiasm nearly matches that of Cisneros. However, Valenzuela showed himself to be less eloquent and less experienced than his DAAP counterpart. Like Cisneros, we doubt Valenzuela can impact state affirmative action policy. Collectively, this makes him even less suited, in our view, to take on the role of general representative.