Wasteful Senate is also inefficient

The UCLA Undergraduate Students Association Council is a model
for student governments across the country. Our current council
system, combined with the extraordinary dedication and ability of
campus leaders, continues to outshine and outperform other
universities.

In 2004, UCLA was the first recipient of the United States
Student Association’s Campus of the Year Award for the
unmatched advocacy and involvement of the UCLA student body.
Unmatched campaigns, community service endeavors and programs are
natural products of an effective commission-based student
government.

Switching from this effective and efficient system to the
wasteful and unproductive senate-based system will severely hinder
USAC’s ability to advocate and program, while leaving leaders
trapped in meaningless bureaucracy and petty campus politics.

In addition to creating more political division and an
ineffective government, the senate will sap funding and office
space from student organizations. Currently, student groups receive
far too few funds. During the last funding cycle, 108 student
organizations requested over $363,000, but only about $38,400 was
available for allocation.

Senate proponents also support a special election, which would
cost $5,000 of student money, further draining student resources.
With over 700 student organizations competing for resources, USAC
should be working to support these organizations instead of
implementing a detrimental senate system that will take money,
resources and leadership from the student body.

In addition to shrinking the overall pool of resources available
to students, the senate will make it much more difficult to access
the remaining student funding and other resources.

In fact, student government leaders at other UC campuses have
indicated that simple funding allocations take about five weeks and
are many times never approved. This restricted access to funding is
caused by politically divided senates that fight for power instead
of providing campus services. USAC’s current commission-based
system quickly and efficiently approves funding allocations on a
weekly basis.

Senate supporters claim the senate-system will increase
representation on campus. While the senate would create additional
leadership positions, the newly formed senators would be
meaningless figureheads.

Instead of contributing to the campus in tangible ways through
programs and policy formulation, the senators will simply vote on
political “bills” with no ability to implement any
substantive change. Isolated senators who cannot create programs to
implement their ideas cannot successfully serve student needs.

Students already dislike USAC because it is “too
political.” The senate system will increase campus politics
instead of contributing to the campus positively.

As seen on other campuses, like UC Berkeley, the senate is
intensely political and slates dominate the senate with more than
three quarters of their 20 seats from the two major parties on
their campus. This escalates into lengthy meetings that result in
angry students and a divided campus.

With 20 talking heads whose jobs are to argue and debate about
things such as the Undergraduate Student Association bylaws for
most of the year, a senate-based student government would
undoubtedly dissuade many students from getting involved in
meaningful ways in the commissions and USAC offices.

The job of USAC is to provide valuable advocacy and resources
for students at UCLA. The senate system, however, attempts to
deteriorate USAC’s value by transforming it into a body that
no longer specializes in beneficial student services, but instead
focuses on the implementation of rules and regulations that are
mired in politics.

Wood is USAC’s president.