UCLA’s chapter of a prominent activist student group
continues its unique struggles to survive and shake the nickname of
“The five-dollar-a-quarter group.”
Since 1994, The California Public Interest Research Group has
survived by organizing a pledge drive every quarter. They ask for a
$5 pledge from each student per quarter, and must get at least 15
percent of the student body’s pledges for any of them to be
processed.
“It’s good for our chapter because it binds us
together. We’re all making a conscious effort to go out into
UCLA and raise money for issues that we care about and are very
dear to our hearts,” said UCLA Campaign Coordinator Mark
Thornton, a second-year history student.
Students who pledge CalPIRG have $5 added to their Billings and
Receivables account each quarter until they graduate.
Last quarter, CalPIRG was in a crisis situation due to the large
influx of new students at UCLA. The group had to spend more effort
than usual pressing for donations during their week-long pledge
drive.
“Last (quarter), that was more of an issue, people were
thinking of us as more of a tag on your bill,” said
Thornton.
Despite their push for publicity, CalPIRG’s message beyond
their cost still has not been heard by everyone.
“They were all over the walk and asking everyone to
pledge,” said fourth-year Asian American studies student Anna
Alcantara, who added that she didn’t know too much about its
programs.
In its 2000 Southworth decision, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled
that mandatory student fees allocated to political and
religiously-affiliated organizations did not violate free speech
rights.
However, CalPIRG has no intention of getting off the pledge
system during the present budget crisis.
“I think that having the pledge system is a good way for
us to get the money that we need to operate. Obviously it’s
not the ideal system, but right now, it’s the one we have,
and it works,” Thornton said.
CalPIRG receives about 75 percent of its funds from pledges and
25 percent of its funds from private donors, said Campus Organizer
Becki Kammerling.
CalPIRG, as a political lobbying group, traditionally has been
denied access to student fees since its establishment in 1976.
Political lobbying groups and religious groups were denied these
fees since students who did not agree with their views could not
pull their contribution.
Until 1990, UCLA students had $3 added to their student fees
each quarter unless they requested not to be billed for CalPIRG
activities, known as an opt-out or waivable fee system.
That year, CalPIRG threw its weight behind Proposition 128,
commonly known as “Big Green” by proponents and
“The Hayden Initiative” by opponents. Proposition 128
would have greatly increased environmental controls across the
board, specifically restricting and regulating industrial
chemicals.
Several companies that would have been hurt by the proposition
donated money to the University of California or had ties to UC
Regents.
Proposition 128 failed as the economy faltered, and the Exxon
Valdez oil spill faded from the public’s memory. Groups
against Proposition 128 convinced voters that any benefits would
not be worth the resulting job losses and increased public
spending.
The regents then changed CalPIRG’s funding situation,
citing the likelihood that many students didn’t understand
where their money went and that the system thrived on apathy. They
proposed an opt-in system where each individual student could elect
to pay the optional fee.
Anticipating a change in their funding system, students at all
nine campuses voted preemptively to maintain the opt-out system
rather than have the regents decide for them.
Students at the time believed that their democratic system had
been undermined by the regents’ decision and that a lack of
donations under the opt-in system would destroy the lobby.
Many consumer advocates, including CalPIRG founder and activist
Ralph Nader, said industries were taking revenge on CalPIRG for its
role in supporting Proposition 128.
“They thought that by pulling our funding they could kill
us so that we wouldn’t be able to attack their ties with
agricultural companies and make them look bad,” said Erin
Walsh, UCLA chapter chair for CalPIRG and a third-year chemical
engineering student.