Next week, a student fee referendum benefiting the Undergraduate
Students Association Council will be put to a vote of the
undergraduate student body.
This referendum would raise quarterly student fees by $9.25 per
student, a rather unnoticeable sum relative to what students are
already paying for their education. The point, however, is that
massive benefits can be attained by this small sum.
As budget review director, I presided over a committee this past
summer that was, quite literally, handcuffed in terms of the total
amount of money we were given to work with. The total amount to
allocate to student groups and constitutionally defined USAC
offices did not even reach $100,000.
That’s right; more money was spent on a vending machine
outside Bunche Hall than on one of the most important funding
sources for student groups.
Because of this, no group or office received nearly what it
required to provide the student body with programming that can
adequately supplement a college education.
This lack of funds became even more grossly apparent to me as I
studied UC Berkeley’s budget for their student government.
The total amount had seven figures.
Of course, given USAC’s overhead costs and earmarked
funds, we cannot possibly hope to compete with Berkeley in this
regard. But the fee referendum would provide groups with more money
than they have seen in many years, roughly $210,000 in additional
base budget funds.
There are two particular points of contention that need to be
addressed. First of all, one major criticism of the referendum is
that many students would not see their funds being put to good use
because they would be allocated to groups and programs that do not
particularly cater to those students’ interests.
This is exactly why the referendum needs to pass. If it does,
there will be money available to a much wider range of student
groups.
Indeed, large groups with a proud history of programming would
still receive the largest sums, and justifiably so, but smaller,
more recently established groups would now have access to funds for
the first time.
Secondly, there has been much debate in recent years over the
use of online voting. For those that are unaware, such a system
will be employed on MyUCLA for this referendum. What better way to
involve students in the political process than by making it easier
for them to cast their votes? Furthermore, last year’s
student government elections cost roughly $25,000. Personally, I
would love to see that money go straight to the student groups.
With online voting in place and the cost of elections drastically
reduced, this seems feasible.
If the referendum passes, you will see a vast increase and
expansion of student programming such as culture shows, community
service events, educational lectures, networking seminars, campus
safety advocacy, student health events, entertainment and efforts
to increase student participation in the political process both on
and off campus.
As a student myself, I am more than sympathetic about the cost
of an education. However, when such a small amount of money per
student can produce such enormous benefits, the choice becomes
clear. I urge all undergraduate students to go online and vote for
the fee referendum on Oct. 30.