While the Student Judiciary failed to rule on the legality of the seg-fee opt-out petition by press time, it is likely that students will have the opportunity to vote on the new method of fund distribution this week. The proposed \opt-out"" system would allow individuals to choose not to fund certain student organizations, the only caveat being that a student cannot participate in a group he or she has not funded. The opt-out system has been touted as a way to get students more involved by giving them a larger degree of control over funding of certain groups, and even as a way to cut down on the fiscal absurdities and inefficiencies we have all grown to know and associate with Associated Students of Madison.
Appealing as it may seem at first, the opt-out system poses a serious threat to the very community it intends to foster, as well as a number of practical difficulties.
Both well-known and obscure organizations quietly make important contributions to the campus community every day. Unfortunately, the opt-out system suffers from the assumption that only the students directly participating in a student group benefit from its existence. But many groups on campus seek to raise awareness about social or health issues and reach out far beyond their member base. Others do far more than their names may imply, like the Asian and Pacific American Council, which, among other things, sponsors women's self-defense workshops.
Finally, the opt-out system threatens minority groups that provide important counterpoints to the dominant perspectives and dialogues on campus. The Multicultural Student Coalition and WisPIRG both represent political voices on this campus that, though many students may not agree with their methods or objectives, stimulate a more colorful and vibrant political climate.
Those who support opting out want to cut politicians out of the seg-fee system by giving students more direct access to student organization funding. But all such a system can really do is make the student organizations into politicians by creating a climate where funding is determined by visibility and popular support. Flawed as the current system may be, it has created a climate in which a staggering diversity of student organizations flourish. If the referendum passes, some groups that make valuable-if underappreciated-contributions to campus will face grim prospects and the marketplace of ideas will be adversely affected.
The most compelling argument against voting for the opt-out system, however, is simply that most people do not understand it yet. Reports on the opt-out system have been vague, most students are not clear on which organizations it would affect and no one has investigated its implications. Voting for such a radical policy with only the vague knowledge that has disseminated throughout the campus thus far would be nothing short of irresponsible.
