Shady Campaign Stuff 1

Some shady campaign stuff.

A blue sheet, perhaps put out by the Committee on Student Fees, lists the three fee referenda. Yes, the three. For some reason, the Squelch fee didn't deserve further advertising.

There was also a chick who came by trying to hand out brochures for the Lower Sproul fee. She was working for the ASUC, in particular under Joyce Liou, I believe. She tried to explain the fee to me for "informative purposes only" and then proceeded to make arguments for it, such as "if we don't pay the fee, nothing will get done" and so on. Yes, the ASUC is using its authority to "inform" us in a highly biased way. No big surprise here, of course. I don't run negative campaigns because I don't want to take on the entire apparatus of the ASUC and university. But the conversation was interesting, as the person who was trying to "inform" me had no clue what the fee did. She eventually had to run off and get backup, and then bitched to me about how I wasn't "nice" as she sat there, spending my money to convince people to spend even more of my money while demonstrating her utter incompetence on my dime. The discussion went something like this:

The fee increase will redevelop Lower Sproul.

Um, no. It doesn't do anything. The redevelopment is going to cost a $100 fee increase or more. This is just for "planning" or some shit.

Oh, sorry, I meant that it's out there to get the students' opinions about Lower Sproul.

Then why is there a fee increase attached?

Well, it's not like, if you vote for it, it'll automatically increase your fees.

What the fuck are you saying now? It's a fee increase! If it passes, it increases our fees.

Well, we wanted to see if people were willing to pay for Lower Sproul redevelopment.

Then why not propose the entire fee increase to see if people are willing to pay for Lower Sproul redevelopment, rather than proposing a smaller one which will be easier to pass and won't answer that question.

Well, I'm here just to inform you. If the fee doesn't get passed, nothing gets done.

Are you arguing for the fee increase?

Yes. I mean, no! That's not my job!

Nothing gets done if the fee does get passed. Did you read the discussion in the Senate minutes.

That's not my job! I'm just here to inform you!

Then why do I know more about this than you do? How can you inform if you don't know what the fuck is going on?

... ... I have to go get my director.


How DARE anyone ask questions.

Finally, Men's Octet was using the crowd it assembled during their frequent performance on Sproul to push for the Student Life Fee. Yay!

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 4/12/2007 02:25:00 PM #
Comments (3)

. . .

Comments:

Sigh.
Why does Squelch always get left out of the illegal campaigning?

Always a bridesmaid, never a bride.

# posted by  Anonymous : 3:07 PM, April 12, 2007

 

The thingie wasn't really campaigning, it just listed the referenda. I don't know if that makes you feel better or worse.

# posted by  Beetle Aurora Drake : 4:49 PM, April 12, 2007

 

I've found the whole election very confusing.

Basically whenever I talk about the Squelch referendum, I have to make it clear that though I'm the editor, the magazine does not and can't endorse it and I'm talking as an individual.

It has been suggested to me that any suggestion that the Heuristic Squelch magazine supports the referendum on any level would be some sort of violation. So those of us who both work on the magazine and are campaigning have been very careful and have made sure to use absolutely none of the magazine's resources and to use specific phrases.

Then I see capella groups and movies and concerts campaigning and facebooks advertising student group events and political events in the same group and all this stuff and I just sort of think "Wait, huh?"

We've played it very safe because we know that in '96 some Squelchers ran a special election issue using only advertising money that basically called one of the candidates a "giant pile of slime," and the magazine was severely punished, losing all funding for over a year and nearly going out of business.

So we play it safe, but I've seen so much sketchy stuff this year that it almost makes me go "Man, playing by the rules absolutely sucks."

# posted by  Anonymous : 6:08 PM, April 12, 2007

 

Post a Comment