Thursday, January 30, 1997
ACTIVISM:
Critics need more involvement, thorough researchBy Telly Tse
Sometimes, attacks that are unfounded or poorly researched simply do not warrant a response to dignify it. However, the absence of truth will lead to people seeking everywhere, even in the wrong places, for leadership.
I will not allow this to happen.
Who am I? What stake do I have in writing this? Is there a hidden political motive? Is there anything I hope to gain from this? These questions will surely be raised because the time has come for the political alliances on campus to mobilize themselves for the upcoming election. The wheels are already turning as people begin to pay close attention to our student government and the people that are involved in it.
To this, I say only one thing I am a person who only wishes to speak the truth. I have defended the Undergraduate Students Association Council (USAC) before. In fact, all my contributions to the Viewpoint section (two of them) have been about USAC. It is only a result of my anger when I see lies and misguided attacks on our student government.
I am a part of student government. I am a part of it because I want to play a role in making it better every single day. Now let me ask you this: Who is Jennifer Nelson? Who is Ben Hofilena? Who is J. Jioni Palmer? Who are they? Why aren't they a part of student government? How come they are not on any staff of any office in USAC? They seem to have so much enthusiasm attacking the council and yet they have no desire to involve themselves if they are so displeased? Now does a person have to be a part of student government in order to criticize it? Of course not. But why do they speak so vaguely about USAC doing this and that, but offer the students no better structure. Where's the monterey jack with The Bruin because I like my whine with cheese.
My motivation here is to tell the truth. What is theirs? Palmer, in his article, lambastes Academic Affairs Commissioner Max Espinoza for plotting to "succeed John Du as president." He claims that his actions are geared toward that motive. Well, what is Palmer's? What is Hofilena's? What is Jennifer Nelson's? They had the entire year to play an active role in USAC and to be involved so these articles cannot possibly be a step toward running this year, could it? Wouldn't that be hypocritical? Perhaps Nelson is waiting for USAC to be separate but equal, but who knows?
Let's take these attacks one by one. Jennifer Nelson starts off her article by declaring that "fundamental to any democracy is the ability of the electorate to hold public officials accountable for the actions they take while in office." That is an excellent point. My only question is, who holds the Judicial Board accountable? By nature, the Judicial Board is supposed to be independent from the students so that its members do not have to answer to anyone except their own conscience. So when Justice Jihad Saleh is a board member of an organization, does that not create a conflict of interest? Since the people cannot hold him accountable, USAC did. This follows to a point what Nelson states is "fundamental to any democracy." And while it would be outrageous for Nixon or Clinton to overturn the Supreme Court, USAC is not made up of one person, but 13. And if you think it's easy to get 10 people to agree to overturn a Judicial Board, you did not attend the three-hour USAC meeting. Should we change the constitution simply because 13 people from the same student coalition sit in the council this year? Should we change laws because they are inconvenient? A democracy, a constitution is meant to withstand the tests of time and the terms of different people with different ambitions. Even Nelson admits that no law was broken here.
Now let's take a look at Palmer's concerns. Palmer highlighted the fact that USAC should not have funded the affirmative action rally last quarter. I agree absolutely. If anyone who felt their student fees were misused, they can get their money refunded. But the decision to overturn the Judicial Board's ruling was not about this issue. It was about what was and what was not in the constitution. This must be clearly understood. The council absolutely agreed that money was not appropriately used. This can be verified in the minutes of the Dec. 10, 1996 meeting. I have no doubt in my mind that Palmer truly believes that he is right. But the fact remains that the council acted in the best interest of students.
Palmer's second major point is the conflict of interest concerning Saleh. He questions the timing of Espinoza's discovery that Saleh was a board member of the African Student Union. Sounds fishy, doesn't it? I agree. Why did Espinoza have to discover it? Why didn't Saleh ever make this known in the first place? Why did someone else have to point it out? Palmer's concerns are respectable, but misinformed.
Finally, to address Ben Hofilena's article from two weeks ago, I sympathize with his concerns, however misguided they may be. To accuse students of voting merely on race is a insult to the intelligence and motivation of every UCLA Bruin. I am confident that many students share this sentiment when I say that I vote on merit, not on race.
Corruption in student government? Absolutely not. Perception of corruption? Perhaps, but that comes with the any position of power and responsibility. Achievements from USAC? Excellence from programs from USAC? Undeniable.
The greatest tragedy in all of this is that Jeff Ellis has been forgotten. Last quarter, Ellis challenged the student government by himself with no support and no backing from anyone. He sought nothing but what he believed was right and in his heart. In the midst of his personal quest for justice, a mysterious group of people have latched on to this issue to attack student government. Forgotten is Ellis's message. Instead, he has merely become an excuse for muckrakers to slander USAC.
What is the truth? Who is right and who is wrong? Who should you believe? Trust the facts. Everything mentioned is a fact. Every argument made here is sound. Does this mean that student government wins because we were able to quiet poorly researched criticism? Absolutely not. The ultimate victory is for all of you to come to Kerckhoff Hall and see for yourself how student government functions. Come to a USAC meeting. Visit the office of a council member. Talk to them. Ask them about their plans for UCLA. Ask them about Mike Piazza's new $15 million contract. Get to know them. Ben Hofilena, Jennifer Nelson, J. Jioni Palmer: This means you as well.
Every student has a right to criticize their government. But the input has to be well-founded and motivated by the right reasons. In these instances, USAC has been attacked for preserving the dignity of the constitution, for acting within the law, and amending their actions when asked by the Judicial Board (provided the reasoning was fair). More than any other year, student government has countless achievements to stand on in a year that is not even half completed. To preserve USAC, we must stand by the fact that while we may not always agree with each other, we shall agree to disagree because this is what student government, this is what life is all about. Attacking the very system that allows this from the outside without knowing the real facts is a disgrace.
My name is Telly Tse, and I am a part of student government. Are you?
Tse is a second-year political science and history student and the president of Sunset Village.