Though Surafel Tsega of Campus Events downplays the value of a
refund of the Undergraduate Student Association fees
(“Letters to the Editor,” May 10), most students would
probably find $120 a year ($480 over the course of four years) in
fees to be a considerable sum.
Tsega, along with some other members of the current
establishment, paints a dark picture of student life on campus if
the refund of the Undergraduate Student Association fees were to go
through.
In reality, many programs probably would succeed if not funded
by student fees. Many groups ““ up until last year ““
were not eligible for funding unless they were Officially
Recognized Student Organizations, yet campus life thrived.
In fact, there seems to be little, if any, noticeable difference
in the quality of student life since funding has been opened to
more groups.
Should a refund be enacted, I will voluntarily give my student
funds to the groups I support. I challenge all refund detractors to
do the same.
Groups that offer valuable services to students will undoubtedly
be funded just as well as they are now; some may even receive more
money.
For example, in clubs that boast large memberships, such as
Bruin Democrats, if 50 students give just $20 back to the club, the
club would be just about as well-funded as it is now.
In fact, the current fee system probably causes students to feel
as if they’ve already contributed their shares. The causes
and events on campus that compel students will undoubtedly be
voluntarily supported.
Dance Marathon, which was only recently supported by the
Undergraduate Students Association Council, was a thriving and
growing program before it was funded.
Even if this were not the case, there is no moral justification
for forcing other students to fund causes they do not support.
Detractors of Slate Refund portray a conflicting picture, one in
which students recognize the programs and activities that enhance
their undergraduate experience here at UCLA, but these students
choose not to invest in their own happiness when given the
choice.
Those who make these conflicting arguments suggest mooching off
other students in such a system and then hope that other people pay
““ but they don’t put their money where their mouths
are.
To them I say speak for yourselves ““ the rest of us at
UCLA are adults and would thrive under a system based on freedom of
choice.
Lazar is a candidate for internal vice president.