Monday, November 24, 1997
Regents don’t care about problems
GOVERNMENT:
Appointed officials don’t answer to who they represent
Do you know who comprises the University of California Board of
Regents? It is the governing body of the University of California
system; in other words, they have the final say on everything at
this and the other eight UC campuses. Having so much control over
the lives of students, you’d think that they would have some
administrative experience in higher education so that they could
help us with our problems. Actually, they don’t. In fact, the UC
Regents are part of the problem.
First of all, the regents can’t possibly represent the concerns
of working-class students. The regents are appointed by the
governor of California. They are not elected by students. Regent S.
Sue Johnson is the co-owner of a tractor company. Her net worth is
$820,000. Why is she a regent? It could have something to do with
the fact that she gave $2,950 to Wilson’s campaign.
Meredith Khachigian is the chair of the Board of Regents. She
also just happens to be the wife of Wilson’s campaign manager.
Regent David Lee is the owner of a telecommunications company. He
also just happened to give Wilson $3,000 over a period of four
years. Howard Leach, another regent, is an agribusiness owner. His
net worth is about $4,368,000. Why is he a regent? It might be
because he contracted $82,340 to Wilson’s campaign.
In April 1991, the Richmond Unified School District, now called
the West Contra Costa Unified School District, was going to end
classes and shut down early because it was in enormous debt. When
they asked the state to give them the funds to continue operations,
Wilson refused. The school district took him to court, and a judge
ruled that the state government must provide the funds necessary
for the schools to continue educating the students.
Why is this opponent of public education a regent? It is by
virtue of his office as governor. This is the same man who tried to
run for president by chanting that we must end preferences in
hiring. Is it me, or is Pete Wilson the most powerful hypocrite in
the state? Every Bruin pays big money to come to this school, read
assigned books, and lay our heads down at night somewhere. We can’t
afford to give any money to Wilson’s campaign, but if we did he
would probably give more support to public education.
Money is only the beginning of our problems. The current
domestic partnership policy of the University of California extends
health, housing and child care benefits only to those students,
faculty, and staff who fit the husband/wife/child model of a
family. If your family doesn’t meet these characteristics, then you
don’t get those benefits. So if you’re a single mom and a TA, then
you and your child will have to fend for yourself when it comes to
a place to stay, medicine and a babysitter.
The regents have the power to change that, but I suppose that
when you’re not in school and you’ve got more money than you know
what to do with, it doesn’t matter whether a single parent gets the
education necessary to land a good job.
For over 20 years, students of color had one building on this
entire campus to call our own -Campbell Hall. At one time it housed
the Academic Advancement Program, a service created specifically
for women and people of color. Thanks to the regents’ decisions on
SP1, SP2 and Proposition 209, the criteria is now low-income
students.
We need services for low-income students, and I’m not knocking
that, but what about women and students of color? Despite your
socioeconomic background, if you’re a woman or person of color,
then you face particular social issues including discrimination
because you are a woman or a person of color. Now, the university
no longer provides this support service which met the specific
needs of these groups. The regents also have the power to change
that, but given that most of them are white and most of them are
male, I suppose they don’t care what happens to women and people of
color.
There are graduate students on this campus who teach your
sections, clarify what your professor lectures about, and grade
your papers. They help this university maintain its reputation for
academic excellence, yet they have no legal right to have a voice
in deciding what kind of benefits, salary, or working conditions
they should have. The regents have the power to give the TAs
collective bargaining rights, but they won’t. Why should they
care?
As undergraduates we help maintain this university’s reputation
for academic excellence. When we graduate and make notable
contributions in our respective fields, we make this campus look
good. In turn, this attracts other fine scholars to this campus,
yet we have no legal voice in the amount of fees we pay or who
controls the university. The regents are appointed, not elected! We
are directly affected by their actions and our voices mean nothing
to them.
There are a lot of great things about UCLA and there are a lot
of things about UCLA that we should be ashamed of. There are
students on this campus who have the grades, the ability, and the
drive to thrive here at UCLA. But they can’t because they are
women, they have the wrong skin color, or they just don’t have the
money. These are injustices that happen on this campus everyday.
There are students on this campus whose biggest problem is the lack
of parking spaces available. Those students don’t know how
privileged they are.