The Praxis members of the Undergraduate Students Association
Council must accept that students have elected a non-Praxis
president for the first time in five years ““ and they must
ensure that infighting doesn’t lead to undergraduates
needlessly suffering next year.
Praxis council members, though, can’t be the only ones
working toward building a united house.
President-elect Elizabeth Houston, who ran independently, must
recognize that, as a transfer student and student government
novice, she lacks some knowledge of council operations and of
important issues facing UCLA students. In the coming months, she
will have to work hard to apprise herself of the day-to-day duties
of USAC president, as well as the issues historically important to
this campus’ students.
While a narrow majority of undergraduates elected Houston, her
election was a fair and democratic one ““ and all UCLA
students, including Praxis members, must accept that.
Still, Houston has some significant work to do in realizing the
scope of the job of USAC president; it means a lot more than giving
money to student groups. Her surface-level understanding of
diversity issues, of the current ASUCLA financial crisis and of the
institutional history of this campus and its student government is,
at this point, severely lacking.
It’s Houston’s inexperience that requires
USAC’s officers work together to teach her what she needs to
know. Although Praxis council members, current and future, disagree
with Houston’s personal politics, they must be willing to set
aside their differences to help prepare the new president for the
upcoming year. Political posturing and marked division would do
nothing but hurt the students the council is supposed to
represent.
USAC won’t accomplish substantive progress next year, with
a majority whose politics are so different from those of the
president, if Houston is not given a chance. At the same time,
Houston must do everything in her power to learn the nuances of her
office.
She must take the opinions of more experienced officers into
consideration, and she must look past the rhetoric of the election.
She has to recognize that Praxis does have something to offer the
campus. Students can question their tactics, but Praxis members
have been the most outspoken activists in fighting UCLA’s
most serious problem ““ the precipitous drop in the number of
underrepresented minority students in the wake of the ban on
affirmative action.
For their part, Praxis officers should understand that
Houston’s election, albeit by only two percentage points,
does mean something. Some of the students who voted feel alienated
from a Praxis-controlled government that they view as divisive and
mean-spirited.
There is a real danger that next year’s council will be
characterized more by divisiveness than by real effort. If this is
the case, then it will be to the detriment of all students ““
whether they’re Greeks, whether they’re members of
minority organizations, whether they live in on-campus housing or
whether they just want an approachable and responsible student
government.
The remainder of the quarter will be crucial in ensuring that
next year’s council effectively represents student needs, and
doesn’t merely provide useless, political drama.
Current President Mike de la Rocha should work with Houston to
make sure she understands the job. Elected Praxis officers should
reach out to her to prove that ““ regardless of their
differences, each person on next year’s council wants to
serve students.
And Houston herself must recognize her own shortcomings and take
steps to broaden her agenda and gain some understanding of the
serious issues affecting this campus.