. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nap Time!!!

Wednesday, February 09, 2005


War number 2

Having just started a war, the only reasonable thing to do is to start another one. This time, though, the topic is quite serious.

Temina Madon has been pushing for a health fee on all students. Info here, I guess. Here are seven reasons why we should be concerned:

1) It costs money. Duh.

2) The referendum process is seriously screwed up, if I'm reading the article right.

For the fee to pass, 20 percent of students need to vote, and a simple majority of voters needs to be in favor of the increase.

If that is accurate, this means that if 18 percent of students vote for the fee, and nobody votes against it, it will not pass. However, if 18 percent of students vote for the fee, and 17 percent of students vote against it, it will pass. The main consequence of this is that if you are opposed to this fee like a reasonable person, by voting against the fee, you are taking the risk that you are going to cause its passage. This is a major flaw of the referendum process itself, though, and needs to be addressed seperately.

3) It is highly unlikely to actually boost health services. Like all voter-approved monetary allocations, standard procedure for administrations is to just move "discretionary money" out of the target service and let the fees fill the hole.

4) There isn't much benefit for us. Sure, community health sounds good, but it doesn't really mean much. The only impact we are likely to see is paying an extra $43.50 each semester.

5) On principle, allowing such referenda to pass supports ridiculous claims such as this one:

The referendum is essential to student health services because it preserves student control to directly improve their own services, Madon said.

To recap, only 10%+1 of students need approve of this fee for the rest of us to have to pay it. Further, those who wish to oppose this fee are discouraged from voting on the possibility that their vote will cause the fee to pass. There is no student control.

6) On further principle, those who oppose such fees are traditionally silenced. Note that the Daily Cal article has no mention of any opposing viewpoints. Anyone who does try to oppose it will be painted with the "You don't care about other people's health, you're just selfish and want money" brush.

7) On even further principle, this proposal has every appearance of a personal crusade, and for us to be cheated out of fifty bucks a semester just so someone can feel good about herself is a travesty. I hate to be callous about this, but when one starts trying to take money, my sympathy for feelings becomes quite minimal.

So stand up and oppose this proposal in whatever way you can.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 2/09/2005 06:32:00 PM #
Comments (0)
. . .
Comments: Post a Comment


. . .