One-Shot

The Not-So Incidental Fee

Well folks, whether you realize it or not, you're all getting screwed. All of you, that is, except for the kids involved in student government and ASUO programs. You either don't know it, or simply don't care. It doesn't matter. You're going to lose your voice in student government regardless.

Every student at this university is taxed $137 a term in incidental fees (I've often wondered how forking out $411 every year can be considered an "incidental" expenditure). This money is generously taken from you so that student government can provide us with a much needed dose of "physical and cultural development."

The most amusing part of all this is that you supposedly have control over the amount you pay. After all, this is a student fee, isn't it?

Year after year, the students of this university have the opportunity to elect representatives to the ASUO Executive, Student Senate, Programs Finance Committee, EMU Board, and the Athletic Department Finance Committee. We all come together in the spring to cast our ballots in favor of those folks who will best serve student interests. The problem is that all of us don't come together to vote in student elections. Not half, not a third, heck, not even a fourth of the students on this campus of reputed political activism and awareness vote!

Only 16% of the student body showed up at the polls last spring, and that was a record high. As a result, partisan party politics have been allowed to emerge and thrive within the ASUO.

Since its formation two years ago, the Progressive Party has posed a growing threat to student interests. Founded on the philosophy that the members of the PFC and Student Senate were a bunch of meanies who intended destroy student programming, the Progressive Party sought to elect people who would be more program "friendly." Translation: The Senate and PFC, who agreed upon a 0% benchmarch for that year, scrutinized student groups' budgets to ensure that student fees would not be wasted. Student groups, many of which believed that any expenditure of student fees by their program was a justifiable one, reacted by creating the Progressive Party, whose sole purpose was to cram the governing bodies of this campus with their members.

So, two years later, we find the 18 member Student Senate packed with a powerful contingent of six professed Progressive Party members (alliteration's wonderful isn't it) and an ASUO Executive overwhelmed by their influence. This time around, the Progressives championed the noble cause of gaining the right to spend your money on food. What better use of your hard earned cash than to buy somebody else dinner. How generous of you. Your parents would be proud. Luckily, the Senate has yet to change their rule regarding the expenditure of incidental fees on food. Cross your fingers and hope it doesn't happen.

Some would have you believe that, since "the history of this body (the Senate) is rife with people walking all over student interests," the election of these new "progressive" voices should be enthusiastically welcomed. Please forgive me if I'm not overjoyed. When one looks at the fact that the incidental fee has increased by an average of approximately $17.55 per year since 1990, for a total change of $123, you have to wonder whose rights are being trampled.

It's obvious that the kids who make their homes in the EMU aren't the ones who should be complaining. If this pattern of exponential growth was the trend under relatively non-partisan management, imagine the direction it will take under these peoples' leadership. Shudder. You should be scared.

So, you now ask, what are some other trends that a politically conscious student should be aware of?

Perhaps the most distressing route the Senate has chosen to barrel down in the last two years concerns the approval of new goal statements.

In order for a student group to be eligible to receive incidental fees, the Senate must approve its goal statement. One might think that the process of approving a goal statement would require that a group meet the demands of several specific criteria. In reality, Senate Rules mention only that a program must have its "goal statement approved by the Student Senate."

Now, while the Senate is of course bound to follow laws enacted by United States and Oregon governments, it is disturbing that they have relied upon these guidelines only. The lack of more specific rules has resulted in the rubber stamping of six new programs since 1994. Two of these were approved at the October 30 Senate meeting this term.

At this meeting, the Senate almost completely avoided asking questions of legality. Senators were more concerned with how interesting the two programs sounded than with how they satisfied legal requirements and precedents. When asked a question regarding the legality of funding the Graduate Forum, a group which limits its membership, Senate President Kalpana Krishnamurthy could only muster "If I were Martin [Fisher] I would have an answer." The Senate evidently found this response satisfactory, deciding to approve the goal statement by a vote of 8-3-1.

What does this mean in the big scheme of things? Well, with four new groups added last year and two more already approved before November of this year, the Senate and PFC are left with two choices:

1. Fund the new groups. At the same time, decrease or cut funding for traditionally funded programs in order to the maintain the incidental fee at its current level, or

2. Raise the incidental fee so that the new groups may receive funding while the traditionally funded programs may receive budgets at the previous year's level.

So, by approving so many new goal statements, the Senate has created a lose-lose situation. They can either reduce the quality of student groups' programming by spreading the funds too thin, or raise the incidental fee. Neither option is acceptable.

As students and members of the ASUO, you all have a right to raise your voice in matters of student governance. Granted, ASUO officials have failed to educate the student body. Don't use this as an excuse for not caring. Demand that your representatives fulfill the primary duty they are charged with, representing student interests, not those of special interests.

Drop in to the ASUO Executive or Student Senate office. These people rarely hear from concerned students. They are, however, constantly visited by student group members. Who do you think they listen to?

Most importantly, when the spring rolls around five months from now, get out and vote! The only people we have blame for bad government are ourselves.

After all, we elected them.

James Boyd is just bitter, so don't take it personally