After a five-year fight, student pressure and a UC Office of the
President investigation, the Undergraduate Students Association
Council is expected to finally change how it funds student groups.
This change is expected to come as a result of UCOP’s recent
position that change is necessary.
One of the first initiatives I took as a USAC general
representative was to write and present the Equal Access Amendment
in October 2003, only to have it tabled by council. This amendment
would have brought UCLA into compliance with UC policy on fair
distribution of funds. It would have amended the bylaws to allow
all student groups, regardless of their viewpoints, to apply for
funding from USAC.
After two Supreme Court decisions and a recent investigation
from UCOP, this issue has been gaining broad grassroots support
from groups as ideologically diverse as Bruin Democrats and Bruin
Republicans. The amendment was written based upon the Southworth
and Rosenberger Supreme Court decisions, which state all student
groups must be eligible to apply for funding, regardless of their
viewpoints.
The amendment was forwarded to UCOP where it was considered a
needed reform. At the last council meeting, Dean of Students Robert
Naples stated the position of the UCOP in a Daily Bruin brief:
“There’s no question in (UCOP’s) mind that any
law that excludes certain campus organizations from being eligible
for funding because they are religious or political in nature is in
violation of the law.”
UCLA remains the only campus in the UC system that has not
complied with the Supreme Court rulings and, evidently, with
current UC policy.
The fact that USAC will finally change is a clear victory in
support of the Equal Access Amendment. Ultimately, the actions
taken by my office to keep this issue of equality at the forefront
of council’s agenda this year have been an overwhelming
success, marking the beginning of the end of a five-year fight for
equality.
Yet USAC cannot take pride in having done the right thing.
Failing to represent all UCLA students equally, this
council’s StudentsFirst! leadership ended any further
consideration of this issue until they would be forced to change it
by the UCOP. What the Supreme Court called a “First Amendment
civil liberties issue” was stalled by a 9-2 vote on council.
When I brought up the issue again winter quarter, many of the same
counter-arguments were repeated and recurring excuses were used to
justify further inaction.
The present USAC leadership chose to follow rather than to lead,
making it clear that any decision made would be out of compulsion,
not conviction. Apparently, a growing number of students on our
campus, and now the UC administration, are at odds with the USAC
StudentsFirst! leadership on this issue. I have been getting
e-mails and phone calls since October 2003 from students who have
supported the actions of my office. Student governments are
supposed to act in the interest of the students and not wait to be
forced by the administration for the students’ good.
My office believes that this StudentsFirst! leadership is all
about exclusivity and keeping students out of the system. It
isn’t a theory; it’s a fact: This USAC StudentsFirst!
leadership has disproportionally funded its coalition groups and
offices at the expense of the rest of the campus community. The
figures speak for themselves and are available through the general
representative office.
Lawson is the USAC general representative.