• printer friendly
• mail this article
• iPod format
• digg

On today’s Viewpoint page, Undergraduate Students Association Council President David Dahle accuses the Daily Bruin Editorial Board of misrepresenting the circumstances surrounding his Student Judicial Board appointments because “it has an agenda to push.” This is untrue.

The Bruin reported Thursday that Dahle’s appointment of four white students to the judicial board, which interprets USAC bylaws, was rejected because the council was concerned with lack of diversity. The editorial board supported this viewpoint and asked Dahle to reconsider his appointments so as to aim toward an ethnic and political balance.

Dahle correctly points out the board should have considered the large number of minorities he’s already appointed to other committees before claiming “he needs to work on keeping (minority) concerns a priority.” But even then there is a contradiction: on one hand Dahle says “it is sometimes impossible to identify a person’s ethnic background” on applications. But on the other hand he boasts “the percentage of minorities greatly outnumbers non-minorities” in his appointments. So, was he actually concerned about ensuring a diverse representation, or did it get there accidentally?

Dahle also asserts the J-Board should be entirely impartial – he says other government institutions are fashioned this way for the judicial process to work and retain its integrity. But this is entirely unrealistic.

Regardless of candidates’ attempts to ignore their own biases, their socio-economic and ethnic backgrounds are going to affect the way they perceive challenges to the USAC bylaws. And when major contentions arise between the slates, they will likely side with the slate with which they most agree or with whom they feel most attached. Apply this to government institutions as Dahle says, and you’ll find the same pattern in the highest court of the country. In 2000, the Supreme Court voted along the party lines of those who appointed it to basically hand George W. Bush the presidency before all votes were thoroughly recounted. And look who heads the entire Justice Department: John Ashcroft, a man so politically biased and extreme he lost the senate race in Missouri to a dead man.

Dahle points out most of his appointees are Student Empowerment! affiliated, but when you look at the difference between the two slates, it’s easy to see why. SE! is an institutionalized slate with a high volume of support; SURE has less cohesion. At last spring’s editorial board endorsement hearings, Dahle said they were running under a slate because they could not win as independents – the only thing the slate and their supporters had in common was their desire to beat SE! And Facilities Commissioner Annie McElwain said she was running for office because Dahle asked her to – she had no clue of her office’s responsibilities then, and had no relevant ideas of how to improve upon it. It’s not outlandish to believe Dahle selects people that will comply with his desires, even when “independent.”

Even though the majority of Dahle’s appointments to various USAC committees have been SE! members, students shouldn’t forget when it comes to the most important committees – the ASUCLA board of directors and the Budget Review Committee – he appointed all three of the SURE candidates who lost in the elections last year: Dria Fearn, Maggy Athanasious and Justin Levi.

Dahle claims he agrees with the council’s concerns over ethnic diversity, but his actions tell more of defiance than understanding – he has resubmitted three of the same white candidates for appointment consideration.

Dahle has an ethical and political responsibility to research the facts surrounding his recommendations before making a judgment that affects thousands of people.

Comments

Post a comment