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

Nap Time!!!

Monday, March 10, 2008
No opposition here

Did you know that there's nobody on campus who opposes the newest fee hike idea for the ASUC? Or, at least, the Daily Cal didn't feel it worthwhile to find any such person for their article.
Student Action Senator Scott Silver, who sponsored the bill, said it is important for the fee increase to pass, not only for SUPERB to have sufficient funds, but also for other campus groups to have access to more funding.

Silver said he believes the fee increase is a "creative" way to raise funds for student groups.
Well, yes, I guess it is creative, in the sense of avoiding the usual. The normal approach for raising funds for student groups would to just pass a general fee increase which the Senate could budget to student groups. Unfortunately, if we do that, Scott Silver's pet cause wouldn't get enough of that money. Hence, a creative (i.e. less effective) method is necessary, which will include a fee increase about twice as big.
SUPERB general manager Sean Mazur said that, after years of continued budget cuts to the group, a stable budget would help the group establish themselves as a campus fixture and provide more opportunities for students to get together.

"I think that people show up, which means there is a demand ... and with more money we can do bigger and better things and attract more students to our events," he said.
So tap that demand! Normally, if you have a demand but not enough money, you just charge more. In the ASUC, though, you try to get 20% or so of students to vote for a fee increase they don't actually have to pay for in order to subsidize you.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 3/10/2008 07:11:00 AM #
Comments (3)
. . .
That's poor reporting on behalf of the Daily Cal writer. To pick out one word of what probably was a long conversation about the referendum is unfortunate. For you to highlight that as well is just feeding into this poor journalism.

Fee increases are usually unsuccessful, so just let the students vote on this in April and we can move on.
Yes, that's a good idea. The opponents should stop talking about it because it will probably fail, which won't make it easier for the proponents to win when nobody is calling them out on their bullshit. Nosirree. Sure, four out of the last eight fee increases passed, but they usually fail, so there's nothing to see here, and no need to object.

You're not even subtle, dude. Should I ascribe that comment to Scott Silver himself, or just "generic SUPERB lackey"?

When the "journalists" of the Daily Cal start asking tough questions ("Why are you proposing this again when it failed last year?" "Why isn't there a clause that prohibits SUPERB from seeking more funds?" "If you want more money for student groups, why not a general fee increase?") then we'll talk about distorting views. Until then, we have to extrapolate from what little they say, rather than just be silent.
A grad student's comments from last night's senate meeting about the SUPERB fee affecting grads, but only benefiting undergrads.
Post a Comment

. . .