Undergraduate elections mix harmony.strife

Friday, April 12, 1996

Approaches, priorities of slates differ despite focus on similar
issues by both sides

By Brooke Olson

Daily Bruin Staff

With undergraduate spring elections readily approaching, the two
major campus political parties are busy preparing their platforms
for the May ballot ­ platforms which are surprisingly similar
in objective but strikingly different in approach.

Both the Student First! slate and the United Students slate want
to freeze fee hikes, reinstate affirmative action, save financial
aid and provide more affordable services to students. But members
of both parties contended the largest difference exists in the
methods used to meet these goals.

United Students, a typically greek-endorsed slate, believe the
battle is best fought in the boardroom, face to face with the
administrators.

"The greek-endorsed candidates work the area where the decisions
are made," said Rob Greenhalgh, last year’s undergraduate president
who was endorsed by the greek system.

"The decisions aren’t made across Murphy Hall and in the street
­ they’re made inside the administration building with the
administrators," he said.

However, some Student First! members were quick to defend that
they, too, are willing to sit down with administrators.

"We actually go to the regents’ offices and sit down with them,"
said undergraduate President York Chang, a Student First!
member.

"(But) when they refuse to listen to our arguments we escalate
the pressure ­ phone-in campaigns, postcards and stuff ­
and we let them know that their decision will affect students
lives," he added.

Other Students First! members said administrative discussions do
not affect change in campus policy.

"How do you affect change if you just sit down with
administrators and you don’t involve any of the students at all?"
asked John Du, the undergraduate external vice president and
Student First! member. "Unless you have 2,000 students behind your
back saying this is what we want, or 2,000 postcards saying this is
what we need, the administrators aren’t going to listen to
you."

A title, such as undergraduate president or vice president, does
not carry any legitimacy with the administration, Du added.

"In (the administrators’) eyes, you’re nothing but a stupid
student and you will remain nothing unless you pose a threat to
them. This threat comes from mass student action," he said.

But, some United Students member believed that Du and other
Student First! members have severely underestimated the power of
the undergraduate offices.

"If you are mature about your actions and approach them in a
reasonable manner, the administration will listen to you," said
Matt Shapiro, Zeta Beta Tau member and campaign manager for this
year’s United Student’s presidential candidate, Brad Miller.

"Two years ago Rob Greenhalgh had a good working relationship
with the chancellor and he was able to get things done because of
that relationship," Shapiro added.

Even a tempered approach to the administrators is highly
unsuccessful, Student First! members said.

"We are not disinclined to sit down with administrators and tell
them what we want," said Barbara Brazil, the undergraduate internal
vice president and Student First! member. "But it doesn’t work.
What we believe is more effective is organizing students to
participate in unity to take back their education."

This mass organization, United Students contend, will only serve
to lower the amount of the respect the administrators have for the
undergraduate government.

"If you act like children by yelling and screaming, the
administrators are not going to take you seriously," said Stanley
Yen, the council’s financial supports commissioner, who was
endorsed by the greek system.

"Students will not earn respect by being arrested or by
chanting. If you treat the administrators with respect, they will
in turn respect you," Yen added.

Regardless of the methods used to enact change, all candidates
agreed that it is important to improve UCLA policy. But even within
this harmony lies a sea of dissent; party leaders often find they
disagree on which issues should come first.

This year, Students First! emphasized mainly state and national
issues, such as affirmative action and financial aid. Although a
few select programs ­ such as the booklending program and
scholarship resource center ­ affected the campus directly, a
lot of time went into working with state and national student
organizations.

"Through working with national and state student organizations,
our intensive lobbying has managed to save students $17 billion in
federal financial aid and have stopped fees from being raised,"
Brazil said. "These issues are germane to the students and directly
affect their education."

The United Students, though, are more inclined to focus on
campus issues, such as longer library hours, and cheaper, more
accessible services to the students.

"The Students First! have concentrated all of their efforts on
foreign affairs and have dropped the ball on domestic affairs,"
Shapiro said. "We want to initiate programs which would directly
help students, such as cheaper textbooks and food."

Although both slates strongly believe in their method of
approach, some administrators tended to favor the boardroom
discussion.

"In the general sense, what seems to be the most effective over
time is a sitting down and airing views in a civil and open-minded
way verses demonstrations and large rallies and building takeovers
where there’s no real dialogue and there’s no real exchange of
views," said Lyle Timmerman, the assistant vice chancellor for
student and campus life and the undergraduate council’s
advisor.

"That’s been my view of what’s been effective over time," he
said.