Empowerment sure to come from unity

EDITORIAL BOARD Editor in
Chief  Timothy Kudo

Managing Editor
 Michael Falcone

Viewpoint Editor
 Cuauhtemoc Ortega

Staff Representatives
 Maegan Carberry
 Edward Chiao
 Kelly Rayburn

Editorial Board Assistants
 Maegan Carberry
 Edward Chiao

  Unsigned editorials represent a majority opinion of
the Daily Bruin Editorial Board. All other columns, letters and
artwork represent the opinions of their authors.   All
submitted material must bear the author’s name, address, telephone
number, registration number, or affiliation with UCLA. Names will
not be withheld except in extreme cases.   The Bruin
complies with the Communication Board’s policy prohibiting the
publication of articles that perpetuate derogatory cultural or
ethnic stereotypes.   When multiple authors submit
material, some names may be kept on file rather than published with
the material. The Bruin reserves the right to edit submitted
material and to determine its placement in the paper. All
submissions become the property of The Bruin. The Communications
Board has a media grievance procedure for resolving complaints
against any of its publications. For a copy of the complete
procedure, contact the Publications office at 118 Kerckhoff Hall.
Daily Bruin 118 Kerckhoff Hall 308 Westwood Plaza Los Angeles, CA
90024 (310) 825-9898

It is a sad truth that in student elections, much like national
races, you need to be on a slate to get elected. At UCLA, politics
have led to the creation of the SURE slate, a reactionary slate to
Student Empowerment!, which has controlled the undergraduate
council in one form or another for the last five years.

But if students believe the SURE slate is here to clean house
and start anew, then they have another think coming. Students who
are informed about the issues will find little to no difference
between these two slates; both support similar issues such as the
diversity requirement and sustaining BruinGo!, and both want to
stop overcrowding.

When it comes down to it, the differences are not in the slates
themselves, but in the experience, backgrounds and agendas of the
individual candidates. Each side’s candidates value the same
issues and say they want to represent students ““ only they
choose to do it in different ways. The two slates seem to be in
opposition due less to ideology and more to the personal and
historical differences of the groups that make up each
slate’s constituency.

The SURE candidates stand largely on the platform of ensuring
student representation, a reaction to the ineffectiveness of
Student Empowerment!-led councils in past years. But this platform
isn’t the basis for a slate ““ its the basic definition
of their jobs if elected. Yet their claim that Student Empowerment!
historically fails to represent students is a valid one. In recent
years, the Greek system, students in on-campus housing and the
majority of non-partisan students on campus have been left out or
alienated by the identity politics practiced by Student
Empowerment!

As a result, this campus has long been divided between minority
groups, the Greek system, and housing. While the candidates running
in these slates reflect this dichotomy (Greeks and housing
representatives run with SURE, and minority groups run with
Empowerment!), they fail to account for the fact that the issues
students now face are all-encompassing and less divisive than those
years when affirmative action was at stake. Issues like the quarter
versus semester system, and off-campus housing and transportation
have now taken precedence, and both sides must realize this.

No matter the outcome of the election, if each slate is serious
about uniting the campus and the council that their members will
serve on, our representatives must find a way to work together and
bring each other’s diverse experiences, constituents and
approaches to work for all students. Strong student leadership is
hard to find on our campus, and while each slate offers several
promising candidates, the divided nature of each has ensured that
few SURE candidates are backed by the experience they would have
gained had they been able to work in Student Empowerment! offices
this year. Likewise, Student Empowerment! will have to use their
organizing experience to match SURE’s broader base in
achieving student goals.

While Student Empowerment! has shown that they can be
self-serving when elected, there is no doubt that SURE could be
equally as exclusive. For all the rhetoric about polls and
representation, once elected, these offices become about using and
maintaining power and ensuring that any slate or candidate
remembers who got them elected.

As of now, the two slates are in opposition, fighting to get
their candidates elected. But no matter which slate wins a majority
on council, it will be the students of UCLA who end up losing if
the two groups do not find a way to coexist now and in the future.
If both SURE and Student Empowerment! are serious about addressing
the best interests of students, it’s time to start acting
like it.