An Open Letter to Student Government Representatives:
A group of students circulated a petition that would push for giving students the right to choose which organizations receive their segregated fees, a tax all students now pay that financially supports many student organizations on campus.
The students advocating this are picking up where the Southworth movement left off, seeing it as a way to dismantle the seg-fee system, and remove an easy source of funding for the predominantly liberal student organizations.
Of course, the students most in opposition to this proposal are the ones who benefit the most from the current system, which allows a small group of students to levy taxes on the entire student body with little oversight, with little accountability.
And so it would seem that students are now being presented with two choices: either support the current system, or tear it apart.
We, the silent majority, don't find either solution palatable. We're not opposed to funding student organizations (as long as it's done on a more-or-less apolitical basis); we just don't want to see it get out of hand.
Instead, we want to reform student government. The biggest and most dangerous problem student government faces is its deficit of democracy.
As the Associated Students of Madison currently operates, it is certainly an exaggeration to call it a well-operating, democratic institution. Let's look at the reasons for this.
First, who is represented in student government? The fact is that 10 to 15 percent of students vote. How can any government be legitimate if most elected representatives individually receive support from less than 10 percent of their constituents?
Well, you might say, if that means 85 percent of students are content with letting student government spend their money however it wants to, then so be it! Here, dear colleagues, lies the rub: we, the current student body are mostly content. We aren't going to take the time to get educated about the issues in order to save ourselves a measly, say, $50 the next year. Since we're already paying close to $4,500 per year in tuition (or $24,000 per year for out of state), the difference between $250 and $300 a year in segregated fees is a drop in the bucket.
But letting us suffer isn't the answer because, in the long run, this adds up. Students who graduated five years ago don't suffer the penalty for their indifference to budgetary matters; they passed the buck to us. It is this system of deferring costs that has allowed seg fees to rise as much as they have.
Yet since the student body is inherently transient, students will never experience the long-term consequences of financial decisions. This means most students have little incentive to closely watch their tax-happy student government.
Perhaps the best solution is the most practical one: Restrain seg-fee increases to no more than 5 or 6 percent each year. While passing this would limit the freedom of students to make their own decisions, it would strengthen student government, creating a more stable institution.
The first benefit is that of credibility. Tying tax increases to a number above inflation but significantly below tuition counters the perception that student council is made up of tax-and-spend liberal crazies serving their own narrow interests.
Next, smaller budgetary increases allow for time to moderate decisions. When last year's student government greatly enlarged the funding for a few multicultural groups, it sparked an embarrassing debate over the validity of student government. Limiting tax increases would reduce the incidences of extravagant funding and publicity blunders.
Third, it would help de-radicalize student government. Preventing the fringe left from greatly increasing taxes makes the organization less appealing to the fringe right that either wants to do away with student government entirely, or wreak havoc on existing orgs' budgets.
Do the silent majority, and yourselves a favor and stop using our student government as a testing ground for the limits of free speech, and start focusing on improving student governance.
Respectfully,
The Silent Majority
Kevin Warnke is a senior majoring in political science and international relations.
