Dear friends, let us first give thanks that the state of political debate at Brown University remains an inspiring beacon, an example that certain national political leaders would do well to follow. Throughout the course of discussions about the amendment changing the way Undergraduate Council of Students is funded, I have honestly found legitimate, fair points being made by both sides, as well as a willingness to be reasonable and work toward a compromise.
It is in this spirit that I humbly submit a two-part compromise proposal for public discussion, which would replace the proposed amendment. This compromise would alleviate existing issues concerning management of UCS and the Undergraduate Finance Board, without dramatically expanding the power of UCS.
As an opponent of the current amendment, I will begin by conceding that UCS does extremely valuable work, which should be funded appropriately. As noted by UCS President Ralanda Nelson '12 in a letter to student groups, UCS has been unable to secure funding for "providing computer chargers in the library for student use, placing a printing cluster on Pembroke campus and the UCS Annual Teaching and Advising Award."
I will also concede that there are issues with the current funding practices of UFB. In fact, as a student leader for four years in the Sexual Assault Peer Education program, imPulse Dance Company, Body and Sole and Funk Nite, I am strongly in favor of giving UCS more oversight of UFB's funding practices. Again, I quote a letter from Nelson: "I want to see a UFB that publishes financial records publicly after every year." I heartily agree.
With this common ground established, I would like to present two simple contentions. The first, which I make as a graduating political science concentrator, is that no branch of any government can reasonably fund itself. The following analogy is not perfect, but it may be helpful. Imagine that there is political tension between the United States Congress and the president — this might be difficult. The president advocates for a constitutional amendment that would allow his office to fund itself. As much I love the President, I would not vote for such an amendment.
Congress — or, in this case, UFB — may be flawed, and the president well-intentioned, but we still must exercise caution before removing the system of checks and balances that functions as the bedrock of democracies, both large and small. Allowing UCS to unilaterally fund itself may not prove problematic before you or I graduate, but it would set a dangerous precedent, under which funding could potentially be taken away from beloved student groups and events at Brown.
My second contention is that the current process for voting on the amendment is unfair. Unfortunately, Nelson, whose hard work and passion I have appreciated on other issues, opened voting on MyCourses after sending an email to the student body and publishing an editorial in The Herald. Students were not presented with the other side of the issue before being asked to cast an irreversible vote.
UCS needs to provide a mechanism for students who voted on the first day of polling and have since heard the other side of the issue, to change their votes. This may come in the form of a re-vote or a simple change on MyCourses. Anything less would constitute an unfair, tainted vote and would erode confidence in student government at Brown.
As a proud big-government liberal, I do think UCS should receive adequate funding for its important initiatives. In this vein, I make two counter-proposals, which I believe are more measured and tailored to the problem at hand:
1) An amendment that establishes a minimum discretionary annual budget for UCS — a budget that can be raised as approved by the student body.
2) An amendment that increases the categories of items for which UCS can receive funding from UFB, such as the "giveaways" at Brown Employee Appreciation and Recognition Day, which Nelson has advocated.
UCS is asking us, as discerning students, for the power and flexibility to fund projects that matter to all of us. With this compromise proposal, I believe that we can accomplish that end, without unduly stepping on the toes of student groups, or those of UFB.
Let us come together to allow UCS to function effectively for the benefit of the student body, and let us do so without removing fair and necessary oversight. I will bring this proposal before the UCS Forum today, in Lower Salomon at 5:30 — please join me.
Remy Fernandez-O'Brien '12 would like to call his proposal the "STOP — collaborate and listen, UCS is back with a brand new mission" Amendment.
