Pham and Nguyen are co-presidents of the Vietnamese Student
Union.
By Kim Le Pham and Andrian
Nguyen
David Dahle’s apathy and lack of preparation at last
Monday’s USAC endorsement hearings was completely
disrespectful to all the organizations present.
In his recent column (“Empowerment!
discourages students,” Viewpoint, April 22), Dahle
criticized Student Empowerment! for not gathering opinions from
students. Yet Dahle formulated no opinions of his own during the
USAC endorsement hearings.
Instead of identifying key issues that affect the campus
community and communicating a solid plan of action, he answered
repeatedly, “I had no involvement with your group, but I
full-heartedly support all your student issues.” What
initiatives has Dahle taken this year to understand these
communities, much less these issues he claims he will advocate?
After a year of serving as one of the USAC general
representatives, a position that requires active solicitation of
the student voice and constant communication with student
organizations, Dahle failed to be involved with any of the student
groups present at the endorsement hearings. If Dahle has not even
come close to accomplishing his responsibilities as general
representative, why should we believe he will carry out his
promises as president?
In his article, Dahle encouraged UCLA students to “hold
your representatives accountable,” yet he has not even been
accountable to the students on this campus. He also states in the
article that he is a minority student since he is half-Vietnamese,
but when asked about his efforts to advocate for the Southeast
Asian community, he uttered a familiar refrain: “I was not
involved with the Southeast Asian community, but I do support your
issues.” If Dahle failed to represent and be accountable to
his own community, how can he represent and be accountable to the
entire student body?
Throughout the hearings, Dahle appeared disinterested and did
not even put forth a decent effort to answer questions posed by the
organization representatives. In addition to his disrespectful
demeanor, Dahle failed to provide new ideas to the office of USAC
president. His proposals for the USAC newsletter and Web site, USAC
meetings during the day and a USAC-wide internship system are all
components already implemented by the Student Empowerment! officers
currently on the council.
Dahle also stated that he was opposed to housing and parking fee
increases and would like to find alternatives to these fees
increases, but he, like the members of his SURE slate, did not
offer any alternatives or plans of action.
While Dahle’s criticism of Student Empowerment! serves as
the main impetus of his political platform, he still neglects
important campus and societal issues such as admissions and
curricular reform, student-initiated outreach and campus retention.
For example, Dahle said during the endorsement hearings, “In
principle, I am for outreach,” but was unprepared to
elaborate on this issue, as was characteristic of the entire night.
Throughout the hearings, Dahle displayed plenty of rhetoric, but a
candidate for USAC president must demonstrate initiative,
experience and qualifications. Ideas alone ““ especially
without a plan of action ““ are not enough to carry out the
vision of student government at UCLA.
From his unspectacular record on council and from the recent
USAC endorsement hearings, it was apparent that Dahle did not use
his past year on USAC to gain the leadership skills and experiences
necessary to unite the campus community, identify important student
issues, and address the concerns of the undergraduate students of
UCLA.
Obviously, Dahle’s lack of respect for the endorsement
hearings and for the entire election process was a tactic that he
and his proponents have tried to use to exploit the Student
Empowerment! slate. Ironically, it is Dahle who ended up
disempowering himself and delegitimizing the SURE slate, as he has
proven to be an uncommitted and dispassionate candidate for USAC
president.