Daily Bruin – Page 156

Op-ed: Unfounded criticisms of USAC erodes possibilities for student empowerment

The Undergraduate Students Association Council has grappled over the past few weeks with how to move forward with its upcoming elections. Intermingled with these discussions are statements made by a few students that the council was “conservative” and a “white majority council,” among other inflammatory accusations. Further, these statements, posts and letters unfairly targeted particular council members and students for actions that were never done and statements that were never said.

These erroneous statements aren’t just confusing and hurtful – they criticize and demoralize the idea of student empowerment through student government. We need to understand the history of USAC and stop perpetuating false notions of what this particular council stands for.

Near its inception, USAC was primarily dominated by programs and events, and was essentially a resume-building platform. It wasn’t until Third World Coalition emerged in the 1960s that progressive students could hold the council accountable and engage in broader social justice issues.

The Third World Coalition led anti-imperialist movements and its efforts led to UCLA’s corporate divestment from apartheid South Africa. Back then, USAC fought strongly against racist admission policies, a lack of ethnic and gender studies departments and UCLA’s ignorance of students’ basic needs. It was the progressive students on this council who were at the forefront of these changes and started to hold administrators to a higher standard.

USAC’s goal had shifted to ensure and uplift the political interests of the community.

Since then, we have seen a rhetorical shift, as various political parties emerged and some USAC members took questionable actions that made communities of color on this campus feel unsafe and targeted. Justifiably so, the council has been criticized and called upon to hold its members to higher standards.

Given this history, members of the community running for USAC knew they would be subject to a high level of scrutiny. I, like many others, came in with that understanding when I assumed my role as general representative 1 this year. After last year’s elections, I was proud of and inspired by the elected members I sat next to as we formed a majority student of color council.

I believed USAC would be more accessible to traditionally marginalized communities and able to build sustainable partnerships with previously excluded communities because the council consisted of independent candidates from a diverse set of campus communities – what was slowly being considered as the de facto to the once-dominant Bruins United slate.

I was inspired by how progressive students had played a part in changing the course of UCLA’s history, and I, as a brown, Muslim and international student, was ready to make an impact of my own and make this space more accessible for communities I come from.

But my time on this council has been characterized by having to choose between being a student of color and an undergraduate representative. I have had to constantly defend my identity and be pitted against other students of color. I have been called a “semiracist,” despite the fact that I have fought racism and Islamophobia as a brown Muslim in this country.

Some groups of students have not only made it uneasy, but also uncomfortable for me to serve in my role. This idea of students of color versus USAC not only undermines this year’s majority student of color council, but also disenfranchises the thousands of hours hundreds of students put in each of the 14 USAC offices.

These unfounded negative opinions of USAC not only discourage students from wanting to be a part of this space, but also create a barrier in bringing about tangible change on campus. The council collectively has access to vast resources and administrators on this campus, which can and should be used to benefit our campus communities. However, alienating USAC members and dehumanizing them via public comments, meetings and social media posts deters students from reaching out to their own student government for support.

We need to realize that when members of the public make an active effort to target council members for baseless reasons, it undermines the integrity and accessibility of the council. We need to hold our elected representatives to higher standards, we need to keep them in check and we need to make sure they are transparent and accessible – but we don’t have to antagonize our elected council.

If we keep pushing progressive students away from a space that they have just reclaimed, stop collaborating with USAC spaces and stop utilizing the resources of the council, we will eventually dissipate the transformative power USAC has to provide for our most vulnerable communities.

Haleem is the 2018-2019 USAC general representative 1.

DeVos’ proposal to defund Special Olympics runs contrary to American values

If you don’t already think Secretary of Education Betsy DeVos crossed the line, here’s news: She’s coming after students with disabilities, too.

DeVos proposed cutting millions of dollars of funding last week from the 2020 education budget. To the public’s surprise, the proposal would eliminate $17.6 million from the Special Olympics and more than $20 million from programs that help blind and hard of hearing students.

Twitter quickly erupted with bitter disdain for the proposal and several politicians from both sides of the aisle shared their distaste for these cuts, including former Ohio Gov. John Kasich and California Gov. Gavin Newsom. While DeVos and President Donald Trump tried to quickly alter their proposal in the wake of negative press, we should remember this is not the first time students with disabilities have been threatened by the current administration’s education policies.

In 2017, for example, DeVos rescinded 72 guidance documents from the Office of Special Education Programs and the Rehabilitation Services Administration that help outline the civil rights of people with intellectual disabilities. The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act was passed in 1975 to mandate public education and tailored services to students with disabilities. Of course, it is natural for new administrations to modify existing regulations, but this was a new extreme.

The recent move to defund special education at the primary level and empowering programs like the Special Olympics may discourage and prevent families and young students from pursuing higher educational opportunities. Students with and without disabilities should be entitled to the same, unthreatened path toward a college degree. Belittling and discounting the necessary encouragement and instruction provided by the Special Olympics and other programs for students with intellectual disabilities promote a false norm of there being an even playing field on impressionable minds.

Coupling empowering programs and academic inclusion is important for students with disabilities. Funding for classroom-specific programs provides the necessary resources for specialized attention to students’ unique classroom needs.

On the other hand, the Special Olympics addresses the nonacademic, more personal needs of children with disabilities and aims to help them gain courage through athletic competition.

These two facets of special education physically aid students and promote a world of intellectual diversity.

We’ve seen this at UCLA. Pathway at UCLA Extension is a higher education program for students with intellectual and other developmental disabilities. The overarching goal of the program is to provide students with a pathway toward an independent lifestyle by offering educational, social and vocational experiences under the supervision of trained academic advisors.

Many students in the Pathway program also participate in the Special Olympics at UCLA sporting events, which was established more than 30 years ago. In the program, students with and without disabilities play basketball and soccer on intellectually integrated teams.

But DeVos’ proposed cuts – and the trend of divestment in the community – threaten to harm these programs. While Special Olympics at UCLA is funded by the Community Service Commission, federal cuts may take a toll on UCLA Extension programs and the school community at large.

Kristienne Edrosolan, a fourth-year human biology and society student and president of Special Olympics at UCLA, said it isn’t just about the money.

“The purpose of Special Olympics and them partnering with the Department of Education is to promote a norm of social inclusion from a very young age,” Edrosolan said. “It is important that the government supports what we value as a country. By funding this program and by offering those resources, we are saying that inclusion and accessibility in our schools is important.”

Defunding Special Olympics, the organization that recognizes and promotes Special Olympics at UCLA, can hurt the program’s reach to the community and abroad. As a result, fewer UCLA students may get involved as mentors in Special Olympics at UCLA and fewer local students with disabilities would be able to find programs like Pathway.

“With our students who require more individualized support, any sort of cut would affect them long term,” said Wendy Abarca, Pathway’s student alumni and outreach coordinator.

Cutting support would only fuel the social exclusion students with intellectual disabilities face. Special education funding teaches students with and without disabilities how to appreciate intellectual diversity. Toying with this academic solidarity is cruel.

We need to be eliminating obstructions to primary special education that could prevent students from finding these higher academic institutions and programs, not building them.

The private fundraising capabilities of the Special Olympics might seem to rule out the need for federal government funding. But we have to consider the message that disinvestment – or even the prospect of it – sends: Students with intellectual disabilities aren’t worth the time and money of the U.S. government.

Money is tricky. But a child’s right to be educated is not. What our country invests in should mirror the values we hold – the values that don’t fall under party lines. Budget cuts like these don’t just affect lower-level education, but serve as yet another obstacle students with disabilities face on their journey to higher education and independence.

That, however, is something DeVos is fine adding to her list of malicious achievements.

North Westwood Neighborhood Council recap – April 4

The North Westwood Neighborhood Council is the official neighborhood council representing Westwood Village and UCLA to LA City Council. Council meetings are open to the public and held monthly. The next meeting will be held on May 1 in Weyburn Terrace from 7 p.m. to 10 p.m.

Comments from public officials:

Andrew Thomas, executive director for the Westwood Village Improvement Association, said LA City Council approved the creation of the Broxton Pedestrian Plaza. The association is looking to work with the North Westwood Neighborhood Council to implement event programming in the area.

Carmen Healey, an assistant director of UCLA Community and Local Government Relations, said approximately 9,000 students will attend College Signing Day on May 1, which former first lady Michelle Obama will attend. Healey said UCLA will also be implementing an e-ticket parking system as a replacement for the existing parking permit system in May.

Ami Fields-Meyer, a West LA representative to Mayor Garcetti’s office, said the city is on track to recycle all of its waste water by 2035 as a part of its initiative to become more environmentally friendly. Fields-Meyer added the city plans on phasing out three natural gas power plants in favor of renewable energy sources.

Motions:

The council voted unanimously in favor of funding the operation of and providing donations to Westwood Connect Day, which will take place April 24. Erin Schneider, a field deputy for Los Angeles County supervisor Sheila Kuehl, said the event aims to help those facing homelessness in the area access legal, medical and housing services.

The council approved allocating $1,647 for election outreach costs.

The council voted to endorse Senate Bill 50, a housing bill providing incentives for developers to construct low income or extremely low income housing near Metro train stations. Michael Skiles, president of the NWWNC, said the bill would waive height restrictions and minimum parking requirements for new buildings within a quarter mile radius of any Metro train stop. Some members of the council raised concerns about the inadequacy of the bill and potential gentrification effects despite the presence of anti-gentrification clauses in the bill.

The council voted to endorse Senate Bill 58, which potentially would allow businesses in certain California cities to sell alcohol until 4 a.m. Currently, California businesses are unable to sell alcohol from 2 .a.m. to 6 a.m.

Running back duo hopes to fill big shoes as they progress from bench

Thunder and lightning. Cars and traffic. Peanut butter and jelly.

Many everyday objects come in pairs, intended or unintended.

In a sense, so do people – like Martell Irby and Kazmeir Allen.

The rising sophomore running backs joined UCLA in August and both had cameo appearances in the Bruins’ backfield. But neither claimed the true backup role until injuries to then-seniors Bolu Olorunfunmi and Soso Jamabo midway through the season forced Irby into action.

Following Olorunfunmi’s and Jamabo’s graduations and junior Brandon Stephens’ transfer, Irby and Allen are now the de facto backups behind rising redshirt senior Joshua Kelley. And according to Irby, they can reflect on their shared experiences during their freshman seasons.

“Me and (Allen), we went through the same struggles together,” Irby said. “Like, ‘Are you getting this?’ ‘No.’ ‘OK, I’m comfortable, let’s work through it together instead of feeling alone and you have to work through it by yourself.’ I’ve always had (Allen) since I’ve been here, so yeah, it’s a comforting feeling.”

Neither player saw the field much, and they said they had to adjust to a new playbook and unfamiliar game speed and tempo. The two combined for only 75 carries and 15 catches for 470 total yards and three total touchdowns.

After Allen sprinted through Cincinnati’s defense for a 74-yard touchdown in last season’s opener, he battled recurring injuries and only rushed for 85 yards in seven games the rest of the year.

Irby also played sporadically, and he didn’t rush for more than 47 yards in any game last season.

“They were both kind of thrown into the mix, we had some injuries at the position so those guys kind of ascended up the ladder there,” coach Chip Kelly said. “They’re starting to get more comfortable in terms of what we’re doing.”

Experience aside, it also helps having someone like Kelley as a role model.

“That guy is incredible,” Allen said. “He just does everything right, so I mean, (I) just have to look at him and try to do the same.”

Unlike Irby and Allen, Kelley played two years at UC Davis before transferring to UCLA and walking onto the football team.

After Kelley changed his practice habits following a benching against Fresno State, he snatched the starter role early in Pac-12 play and finished with the 10th-most single season rushing yardage in school history.

That humility, Irby said, is one of his biggest takeaways from Kelley.

“Our coaches are always telling us, ‘You guys have a great example who’s ahead of you, he’s only got one more year left, pick his mind, just talk to him, sit and talk to him and reflect on how he goes about life,’” Irby said. “Because who you are as a person off the field, that’s going to translate to who you are on the field and (Kelley) is a great example of that.”

That work ethic extended to the offseason, but in a different way.

While Allen tried to regain the weight he lost during the season, Irby focused on becoming leaner.

And even though the two have different goals in mind, at least they’re going through the process with the other by their side.

“(Allen) really has become my brother since I’ve been here,” Irby said. “We just have to keep working, keep pushing ourselves. I expect him to hold me to a high standard. I’m trying to do the same thing for him, so that’s where our relationship kind of is.”

Press Pass: The grueling process behind Daily Bruin’s yearly contest for editor-in-chief

While the majority of students will be out enjoying some fun in the sun as we ring in the start of the spring quarter, Daily Bruin staffers will be cooped up in Ackerman Union for hours on end come Friday evening.

Every spring quarter, the Daily Bruin begins a transitional process in which the current editors hand off their positions to budding staffers eager to take over and steer the ship that is The Bruin’s windowless, underground newsroom. That turnover begins on Friday, with the editor-in-chief hearing.

Come Friday, all of the Daily Bruin’s paid staffers and a number of other interested and enthusiastic contributors will gather to select the paper’s next editor-in-chief. The process of choosing the new editor-in-chief can be a grueling one – especially for the Daily Bruin staff members who’ve chosen to dedicate their time and energy to applying for the position.

The application process actually begins in the winter – toward the end of winter quarter Daily Bruin staff members, usually editors or former editors who are interested in applying for the position, meet up with and interview each of the Daily Bruin’s 60 or so editors, in an attempt to learn more about how each section in the paper runs. This can be a particularly time-consuming process, as the interviews can last upwards of an hour, depending on how talkative a particular editor might be.

These interviews have to be completed by the first Monday of the quarter, as that’s when applications are due. Sometime during the stressful week in between turning in their applications and the hearing, applicants must take a three-hour test quizzing their knowledge of general Daily Bruin editorial policy, journalism ethics and other important factoids that will be key for the prospective editor-in-chief to know, such as the status of the Bruin’s financial stability and the names and roles of prominent figures in Westwood and UC politics.

The test is hard – recent applicants have tended to score just around 70%, give or take a couple points here and there. While it’s certainly good at gauging an applicant’s journalistic knowledge and skills, the hearing Friday is where things really start to heat up.

On Friday, the staff of The Bruin will hole themselves up in Ackerman Union and won’t come out until they’ve selected their next editor-in-chief – almost like selecting the Pope, but without the white smoke.

The hearings are notorious among Daily Bruin staff for their oftentimes excruciating length – even when there was only one applicant back in 2016, the hearing lasted a number of hours. Each applicant is allotted 20 minutes to give a speech, further detailing the main points made in their application and 40 minutes for a Q&A with the Daily Bruin staff.

During the Q&A, the staff members present generally ask the applicants questions to further clarify certain details in their applications, but occasionally send a couple of curveballs – last year, when I applied for the position, a particularly feisty audience member asked me what color my underwear was.

After the applicants have all given their speeches and endured the question and answer session, the staff members all deliberate and discuss the strengths and weaknesses of each applicant. The deliberation lasts indefinitely – with the managing editor and digital managing editor leading the discussion, staff members will debate until the room starts to quiet down and everyone is ready to vote.

This is the part that can take the longest – as with any other organization, people love to hear themselves talk. Once the deliberation is over, the Daily Bruin staff will finally vote on their next editor-in-chief. Afterward, the paper’s upper management will count the votes and announce the winner of the vote to the entire staff in the Daily Bruin newsroom.

Once the Daily Bruin staff has made its endorsement, the next step is for the applicants to go through the UCLA Communications Board, which has the ultimate say over who becomes the next editor-in-chief. Historically though, the board has generally chosen the same applicant the staff selected.

It’s a long and oftentimes exhausting process – for all parties involved – but there’s a reason: the editor-in-chief is the face of the newspaper, and it’s important that the applicants are as prepared as possible beforehand. As tiring as it can be, it’s only a little glimpse of what’s in store for The Bruin’s next leader.

Throwback Thursday: Federal investigation of UCLA’s fees for medical flights echoes admissions scandal

Throwback Thursdays are our chance to reflect on past events on or near campus and relate them to the present day. Each week, we showcase and analyze an old article from the Daily Bruin archives in an effort to chronicle the campus’ history.

UCLA is currently being investigated by federal authorities concerning the unraveling admissions bribery scandal.

But this isn’t the first time the school’s caught the eye of the feds.

According to an article published the Daily Bruin on March 2, 1989, federal authorities opened an investigation on the university after it flew a UC-owned airplane to carry organ transplant teams and consequently charged the patients for flights. Though those violations were minuscule in comparison to the current scandal, they seemed like a pretty big deal at the time.

The authorities inquired about whether UCLA broke federal laws when the recipients of the organs paid for the aptly named “harvest teams” to fly around the western U.S. and collect the organs necessary for the operations. The airplane, The Cheyenne 400, flew around at least seven organ transplant teams and charged a whopping total of $23,000 for the convenience.

According to the Federal Aviation Administration, airplanes require specific licensing if carrying shipments for compensation.

“UCLA operates under more lenient FAA regulations,” the article read. Darlene Skeels, a former head spokeswoman for the university, mentioned that UC lawyers were under the impression that special licensing was not necessary. Skeels also noted that UCLA did not need special licensing because the school is a public institution.

Much like the current ongoing investigation, only time dictates whether or not real consequences will materialize as a result of the ongoing investigations.

According to the article, it could take months to reach a decision on the case, and supervisors would determine if the case needs to go to the FAA. If found guilty, the UC and pilot of the plane could potentially face large fines and halt usage of The Cheyenne 400 plane. At the time, it remained to be determined if patients or their insurance companies would sue for being illegally charged.

Interestingly enough, the article recounts an instance where KCBS denounced UCLA for spending thousands of dollars to accommodate jet-setting university officials in The Cheyenne 400, which they hadn’t yet purchased.

The most alarming statement came from J. Timothy Fives, a former UCLA emergency medical employee.

“There’s no room for that kind of indifference to regulations, that kind of arrogance about not complying with the law,” Fives told the Bruin. “I have a hard time stomaching the willful and knowing violation of federal law – especially when it is in regards to safety.”

This statement makes it seem as though UCLA was all too aware of its actions, something that unfortunately echoes the current ongoing college admissions scandal.

[ICYMI: Editorial: Admissions scandal shows how broken system of American higher education is]

Amidst one news story after another of involvement in the college admissions scandal, it’s obvious that academic institutions nationwide are realizing that attempting to quietly slip things through the cracks isn’t an excusable course of action for committing real, big-time errors.

Though being investigated for violating aviation laws doesn’t have the high stakes comparable to that of the college admissions scandal, the 1989 federal investigation is nonetheless a blip in UCLA’s record.

If past investigations aren’t warning enough, perhaps institutions like UCLA will make the same mistakes time and time again. Only time will tell – and hopefully the university will learn to stay out of trouble in the meantime.

UCLA researchers develop device to monitor movement of people in perilous situations

UCLA researchers developed a fire-resistant device that monitors the safety of people working in extreme environments.

Richard Kaner, a distinguished professor of inorganic chemistry who led the research, said the device generates electric signals from a person’s movement to monitor for signs of stillness that indicate the wearer might be in danger.

Maher El-Kady, a graduate student and postdoctoral research fellow in the chemistry and biochemistry department who co-authored the study, said the device, which is about the size of a quarter, can be embedded in the shoes or clothes of people who work in extreme environments, such as firefighters or oil drillers. The device is self-charging and resistant to extreme heat.

“It is basically an all-in-one motion sensor,” El-Kady said. “It converts body motion to electric signals, and we can integrate it into firefighters’ uniforms to monitor their motion and safety.”

El-Kady added that the self-powering device uses a technique called triboelectric charging, during which electrons transfer from a negatively charged object to a positively charged one when the objects are in contact with each other.

“When you rub your feet against the carpet and touch the doorknob, you build off electrons and get shocked from the electricity transfer,” El-Kady said. “In the case of the device, the transfer is between the device and human skin or the floor.”

El-Kady said because motions such as running and jumping create different electric signals in the device, the signals can be used to analyze how someone is moving. He added that the device can send these signals to other people through a Bluetooth transmitter.

“These (provide) important information for the coworkers, because when people are in danger, they usually are not able to ask for help themselves,” he said.

Mit Muni, a graduate student in chemistry and researcher on the study, said unlike previous motion sensors, the device is made from a carbon aerogel. Air makes up 95% of carbon aerogel’s volume, making the material extremely lightweight and easy to use. The material is also what allows the device to tolerate extremely high temperatures, Muni added.

“We tested the device under 200 degrees Celsius for 90 seconds,” Muni said. “The structure of the device was robust and the electric signal it produced was stable.”

Most conventional triboelectric devices stop functioning correctly at this temperature and might even catch on fire, El-Kady added.

El-Kady said the material of the device is safe for the environment and users’ health, which distinguishes it from conventional fire-resistant materials known to have negative health effects.

El-Kady added that triboelectric charging technology can be used to power traveling generators in the future.

“We can integrate such devices into our clothes or shoes,” El-Kady said. “The electricity transfer could be collected and used to charge our phone or computer.”