Friday, October 25, 1996
ACTIVISM:
Resentment stems from belief student fees are being used for
political gainsBy Scott P. Stimson
Daily Bruin Contributor
The Undergraduate Student Association Council’s spending of
mandatory student fees has created a fissure within the UCLA
community.
Conflicting court decisions have only added to the ambiguity of
the situation. According to the 1993 California Supreme Court
decision Smith vs. Regents, the university cannot mandate students
to pay fees that go toward supporting ideological or political
events or groups.
"The University cannot compel students to contribute mandatory
student government fees to support political or ideological
organizations or activities," the decision states.
But a recent verdict handed down in Virginia, known as the
Rosenburger decision, forbids universities from denying funding for
student groups, regardless of their political aim.
Currently, student governments in California must adhere to the
Smith decision. But it is this concept of compelled contributions
and the alleged political nature of USAC-funded events that has
raised the ire of some UCLA students.
Those who disagree with USAC’s spending claim that portions of
their registration fees, about $18 worth, are funding political and
ideological views contrary to their own.
"Currently at UCLA, mandatory student fees are being used for
all those things (Smith vs. Regents) bans," said Jason Steele,
Bruin Republicans president. "The African Student Union and
(Movimiento Estudiantil Chicano de Aztlan) end up receiving money
from people who don’t believe in their causes, and that is
precisely what the California Supreme Court has said is in
violation of the First Amendment."
Student government officials, however, note that even under the
Smith decision, student groups are allowed to stage educational
events, such as Angela Davis’ visit to campus and the recent "Death
of Education" campaign.
"No, we are not being political with these programs," said USAC
Financial Supports Commissioner Richard Bis. "They are put on to
increase people’s awareness and to inform them on issues affecting
them (students) such as registration fee increases and Proposition
209.
"Having a rally on an issue is educational as opposed to being
political. My example of something political would be using student
funds to lobby assembly people.
"I want to stress that the student council is not a political
spending machine. All the time we fund programs that are very
educational."
The African Student Union declined an interview with The Bruin.
MEChA did not return repeated phone calls for comment.
But some say that this is not the first time the alleged abuses
have taken place, alleging that even last year the student
government may have used student fees toward political aims.
"The student government funded buses to carry pro-affirmative
action protesters to San Francisco and to harass the regents into
keeping discriminatory policies," said Steele.
However, undergraduate student President John Du said that it is
within the council’s bounds to fund the students’ transportation to
a meeting that is open to public comment.
"The student government serves as a medium for the student body
to gain access to resources so that they can attend the regents’
meetings and hold them accountable," Du said. "That is completely
appropriate."
Some maintain that the student government funds legitimate
cultural events, and that many of the alleged political stances it
makes are on issues that concern the entire student population.
"The student activist groups (MEChA, ASU, Samahang, etc.)
represent a huge portion of the student body and they are probably
a majority or at least the largest majority of students who care
about what is going on," said Angie Foster, president of the Bruin
Democrats.
"I would say that Students First! (the current USAC government)
has a very broad agenda encompassing all student issues, not only
to save affirmative action but also establishing their Booklending
program, fighting fee hikes as well as fighting to save and
increase financial aid," Foster added.
Meanwhile, some students see the so-called educational events
put on by USAC, such as the Angela Davis visit and Coming Out Week,
as political events disguised as educational programming.
"Only one side is represented by their education programs," said
Brian Tomey, a member of the Bruin Republicans, noting if student
fees are to be used for educational rallies, all sides of the issue
should be presented.
But USAC officials hold the Rosenburger decision as evidence
that they are allowed to give funds to any student group regardless
of their political affiliation.
The Rosenburger decision concluded that universities "cannot
deny funding to an organization based upon their religious,
political or ideological views," Du said.
"If the Bruin Republicans came in and sought funding for a
protest against affirmative action, it would be against the
Constitution for USAC to deny them funding based upon their
political beliefs," Du added, citing that all groups must still
satisfy some requirements to receive funding.
While officials claim that funds are available to any group that
qualifies, if students still disagree with the government’s use of
their money, they can apply for a refund.
"We have a refund process which basically can be used if any
student feels that their money is being used for political
purposes," Bis said.
Despite acknowledging the refund process, some students still
feel that, under Smith vs. Regents, the student government should
not take mandatory fees in the first place if they are allegedly
going to be used for political purposes.
"The point is not to break the law and then give the money back
once you’ve been found out," Steele said. Rather, it is not to
break the law in the first place."