Thursday, January 30, 1997
ACTIVISM:
Critics need more involvement, thorough researchBy Telly Tse
Sometimes, attacks that are unfounded or poorly researched
simply do not warrant a response to dignify it. However, the
absence of truth will lead to people seeking everywhere, even in
the wrong places, for leadership.
I will not allow this to happen.
Who am I? What stake do I have in writing this? Is there a
hidden political motive? Is there anything I hope to gain from
this? These questions will surely be raised because the time has
come for the political alliances on campus to mobilize themselves
for the upcoming election. The wheels are already turning as people
begin to pay close attention to our student government and the
people that are involved in it.
To this, I say only one thing  I am a person who only
wishes to speak the truth. I have defended the Undergraduate
Students Association Council (USAC) before. In fact, all my
contributions to the Viewpoint section (two of them) have been
about USAC. It is only a result of my anger when I see lies and
misguided attacks on our student government.
I am a part of student government. I am a part of it because I
want to play a role in making it better every single day. Now let
me ask you this: Who is Jennifer Nelson? Who is Ben Hofilena? Who
is J. Jioni Palmer? Who are they? Why aren’t they a part of student
government? How come they are not on any staff of any office in
USAC? They seem to have so much enthusiasm attacking the council
and yet they have no desire to involve themselves if they are so
displeased? Now does a person have to be a part of student
government in order to criticize it? Of course not. But why do they
speak so vaguely about USAC doing this and that, but offer the
students no better structure. Where’s the monterey jack with The
Bruin because I like my whine with cheese.
My motivation here is to tell the truth. What is theirs? Palmer,
in his article, lambastes Academic Affairs Commissioner Max
Espinoza for plotting to "succeed John Du as president." He claims
that his actions are geared toward that motive. Well, what is
Palmer’s? What is Hofilena’s? What is Jennifer Nelson’s? They had
the entire year to play an active role in USAC and to be involved
so these articles cannot possibly be a step toward running this
year, could it? Wouldn’t that be hypocritical? Perhaps Nelson is
waiting for USAC to be separate but equal, but who knows?
Let’s take these attacks one by one. Jennifer Nelson starts off
her article by declaring that "fundamental to any democracy is the
ability of the electorate to hold public officials accountable for
the actions they take while in office." That is an excellent point.
My only question is, who holds the Judicial Board accountable? By
nature, the Judicial Board is supposed to be independent from the
students so that its members do not have to answer to anyone except
their own conscience. So when Justice Jihad Saleh is a board member
of an organization, does that not create a conflict of interest?
Since the people cannot hold him accountable, USAC did. This
follows to a point what Nelson states is "fundamental to any
democracy." And while it would be outrageous for Nixon or Clinton
to overturn the Supreme Court, USAC is not made up of one person,
but 13. And if you think it’s easy to get 10 people to agree to
overturn a Judicial Board, you did not attend the three-hour USAC
meeting. Should we change the constitution simply because 13 people
from the same student coalition sit in the council this year?
Should we change laws because they are inconvenient? A democracy, a
constitution is meant to withstand the tests of time and the terms
of different people with different ambitions. Even Nelson admits
that no law was broken here.
Now let’s take a look at Palmer’s concerns. Palmer highlighted
the fact that USAC should not have funded the affirmative action
rally last quarter. I agree absolutely. If anyone who felt their
student fees were misused, they can get their money refunded. But
the decision to overturn the Judicial Board’s ruling was not about
this issue. It was about what was and what was not in the
constitution. This must be clearly understood. The council
absolutely agreed that money was not appropriately used. This can
be verified in the minutes of the Dec. 10, 1996 meeting. I have no
doubt in my mind that Palmer truly believes that he is right. But
the fact remains that the council acted in the best interest of
students.
Palmer’s second major point is the conflict of interest
concerning Saleh. He questions the timing of Espinoza’s discovery
that Saleh was a board member of the African Student Union. Sounds
fishy, doesn’t it? I agree. Why did Espinoza have to discover it?
Why didn’t Saleh ever make this known in the first place? Why did
someone else have to point it out? Palmer’s concerns are
respectable, but misinformed.
Finally, to address Ben Hofilena’s article from two weeks ago, I
sympathize with his concerns, however misguided they may be. To
accuse students of voting merely on race is a insult to the
intelligence and motivation of every UCLA Bruin. I am confident
that many students share this sentiment when I say that I vote on
merit, not on race.
Corruption in student government? Absolutely not. Perception of
corruption? Perhaps, but that comes with the any position of power
and responsibility. Achievements from USAC? Excellence from
programs from USAC? Undeniable.
The greatest tragedy in all of this is that Jeff Ellis has been
forgotten. Last quarter, Ellis challenged the student government by
himself with no support and no backing from anyone. He sought
nothing but what he believed was right and in his heart. In the
midst of his personal quest for justice, a mysterious group of
people have latched on to this issue to attack student government.
Forgotten is Ellis’s message. Instead, he has merely become an
excuse for muckrakers to slander USAC.
What is the truth? Who is right and who is wrong? Who should you
believe? Trust the facts. Everything mentioned is a fact. Every
argument made here is sound. Does this mean that student government
wins because we were able to quiet poorly researched criticism?
Absolutely not. The ultimate victory is for all of you to come to
Kerckhoff Hall and see for yourself how student government
functions. Come to a USAC meeting. Visit the office of a council
member. Talk to them. Ask them about their plans for UCLA. Ask them
about Mike Piazza’s new $15 million contract. Get to know them. Ben
Hofilena, Jennifer Nelson, J. Jioni Palmer: This means you as
well.
Every student has a right to criticize their government. But the
input has to be well-founded and motivated by the right reasons. In
these instances, USAC has been attacked for preserving the dignity
of the constitution, for acting within the law, and amending their
actions when asked by the Judicial Board (provided the reasoning
was fair). More than any other year, student government has
countless achievements to stand on in a year that is not even half
completed. To preserve USAC, we must stand by the fact that while
we may not always agree with each other, we shall agree to disagree
because this is what student government, this is what life is all
about. Attacking the very system that allows this from the outside
without knowing the real facts is a disgrace.
My name is Telly Tse, and I am a part of student government. Are
you?
Tse is a second-year political science and history student and
the president of Sunset Village.