Letters to the editor

Bruin inconsistent in USAC critiques

The editorial “USAC candidates should play by the
rules” (May 3) fails to mention the campaign activities of
the Students First! slate. While the Equal Access Coalition is
attacked for having fliers “carefully worded so as not to
qualify as “˜campaign’ literature,” I ask why the
editorial did not mention the Students First! campaign
strategies.

The official Students First! domain name (both this year and
next year) contains the word “UCLA.” Because it is not
an officially recognized student organization, SF! cannot use the
UCLA trademark.

Furthermore, the election code does not just “seem
contrary to the idea of free speech,” but is a clear
violation of our First Amendment rights.

The editorial also implies I am violating the election code by
campaigning under the “Moochfish” platform. However, if
people visit the Web site, they will find that my name is not
mentioned anywhere in any form on the site. This is a conscious
decision on my part, so that my campaign can follow the rules, no
matter how “picky” codes may seem.

Michi Kono General representative candidate

Lawson does not represent SURE

For the past three years, candidates for the Students United for
Reform and Equality slate used quotation marks to identify their
slate on the ballot. If a student agreed with SURE’s vision,
“Vote for the quotes” was a quick, easy, and ingenious
way for him or her to identify our candidates and support SURE.

This year, members of Joshua Lawson’s slate chose to
surround their names in quotes. This is an interesting choice by
Lawson, and its ostensible goal is to bamboozle voters into
thinking they are voting for SURE candidates. As former leaders of
SURE, we want to be unequivocally clear that Lawson’s slate
is not a successor of SURE. Obviously, slates by nature overlap on
issues, but we believe SURE’s unique vision of student
advocacy and reform is not replicated in any slate running this
year.

Of course, using quotations violates no election code, and
officially Lawson has done nothing wrong. However, his tactic can
be confusing, and we are helping all voters make informed decisions
this year.

Adam Harmetz, former SURE presidential candidate Dria
Fearn, former SURE academic affairs candidate, ASUCLA board of
directors member Gideon Baum, former SURE internal vice
presidential candidate Erica Husse-Jerome, SURE financial supports
commissioner

Governor’s foreign trips beneficial

Mike Bitondo’s column, “Governor’s attention
needed at home” (May 4), expresses outrage that Gov. Arnold
Schwarzenegger, following a string of legislative successes, took
time last week to (gasp) dedicate a Holocaust museum in Israel and
visit injured American soldiers in Germany. According to Bitondo,
Schwarzenegger is shirking his duties because every ounce of his
time ““ even weekends when he, along with most of the
Legislature, is usually out of town ““ should be spent
addressing California’s economic issues.

Bitondo’s principle is ridiculous, unrealistic and
contrary to precedent. More troubling is his assertion that the
“benefits of the trip (were) very limited.”
Schwarzenegger’s visit to Germany to raise the morale of
injured troops could not have been more important ““ not just
for California but for the entire country. While Bitondo suggests
U2’s Bono or Jimmy Carter would be more fitting for such a
task, I am certain most of those injured soldiers would disagree.
Furthermore, Schwarzenegger’s brokering of nearly 1,000 new
jobs for Californians after just a day spent in Israel should not
be scoffed at.

It is disheartening to see Bitondo’s hatred for
Schwarzenegger runs so deep he must waste an entire column on a
partisan cheap shot. I somehow doubt the same column would have
been written if Schwarzenegger were a liberal Democrat.

Ian Eisner Class of 2003 alumnus Former Viewpoint
columnist