BREAKING - ASUC Election Results Released For Propositions
Following university pressure to release fee-related news, the ASUC has authorized the release of the data on the RSF and GA Propositions. Both have passed with significant margins.
The RSF Referendum
Yes: 6672 (67.5% of total Yes/No votes)
No: 3211 ( 32.5% of total Yes/No votes)
Abstain: 1009
This referendum was endorsed by the Daily Cal and pushed heavily by the university administration. I’m actually surprised it is as close as it is. The actual impact of this referendum will be minimum cost-wise for students, but for many opponents, this was battle of principle.
Equitable Treatment for GA
Yes: 3327 (74.38% of total Yes/No votes)
No: 1146 (25.62% of total Yes/No votes)
Abstain: 6419
What’s interesting here is that 60% of the voting population (~10500 voters total) actually abstained from voting on this proposition, probably due to its overly complicated nature. This means that 3000 people (30% of voters, probably 2000 of them grads) passed a major measure to radically change the internal balance between grad and undergrads on this campus.
My prediction: this MOU will not hold up for longer than three years. It’s too complicated for most people to understand, too complicated to apply, and ostensibly it costs student groups thousands of dollars because apparently it’s not equitable for graduate students to pay upkeep for the ASUC and its elections.
Also, note the total vote count: 10892. This is an increase of at least 25% from last year. This will make the candidate election results interesting - those are set to be released on Monday at the earliest.
Who called it “Equitable Treatment for GA”?
Yeah, wait a few years, and the ASUC will pass a new measure, one that gives twice as much money to the GA and gives graduate students triple voting rights while insisting that it’s done in the spirit of “cooperation.”
If it had lost, by the way, the GA would’ve sought actual autonomy, according to Daniels. It’s a shame we missed that opportunity, but why go for autonomy when you can get free stuff?
I’ll call our opposition to the fee increase “as victorious as possible, given a student body that mostly doesn’t have to pay for the fee increase they’re imposing on the few of us who do, as well as university-sponsored campaigns, including mass e-mails using university mailing lists demanding a YES vote to those most likely to vote YES which included a link directly to the election site during voting hours (but only for those likely to vote YES), and an inaccurate ballot question, which was acceptable because it wasn’t ‘completely inaccurate.’” (Yeah, I’m kind of bitter about the way this worked out) A third of voters is pretty good under the circumstances.
Comment by Beetle — May 17, 2006 @ 3:43 pm
The results are disheartening. Since the GA had issues paying for the last MOU, why would this be different?
Comment by Chris Page — May 17, 2006 @ 3:46 pm
The GA didn’t have issues. They just flatly refused to pay, and the Senate/Executives lacked the balls to call them on it. It was comical hearing the GA prez talk about it as if “There’s been confusion in the past, and I think we’ve straightened things out…” I almost hope they do it again, just so we can all laugh at the cowardice of our “representatives.”
Comment by Beetle — May 17, 2006 @ 3:52 pm
Oh, and if the ballot question had actually described the MOU, rather than just saying “will change stuff,” things might have gone different, and the undergrads might have seen “less money for student groups” as relevant. Manny said that the election costs were insignificant, a “drop in the bucket,” and therefore not worth mentioning (yet, oddly enough, worth putting in the MOU).
Comment by Beetle — May 17, 2006 @ 3:55 pm
Why do I have to subsidize people who want to go to the gym? Surely there will be a way to retract by portion of the fee so that I may go and buy running shoes or bicycle parts and exercise on my own. Right? Right?
Comment by Anonymous — May 17, 2006 @ 7:16 pm
Beetle, “less money for student groups” would not have been accurate, because the GA was not paying election costs to the ASUC anyway. Indeed, in a way, there could be said to be *more* money for student groups as a result of this MOU, since the GA will pay some portion of the election costs that it owed.
I’m happy that the MOU passed, shocked that so few voted on it, and depressed about the fee hike.
Comment by Jim Fung — May 17, 2006 @ 9:36 pm
Okay, okay, “GA obligated to pay less which would, if the GA wasn’t a bunch of arrogant assholes, and the Senate a bunch of spineless wimps, leave less money for student groups.”
Comment by Beetle — May 17, 2006 @ 10:04 pm
Insert opinion here.
Comment by John — May 17, 2006 @ 11:47 pm
um, Beetle, you need to add “incompetent” to your list of ASUC adjectives.
you mofos are probably too dense for this to get through those 3 extra inches of skull, but its the fact that the ASUC and its hangers on [read: all of you] are (a) incompetent, (b) spineless, and (c) so very, very stupid, that drives much of the GA sentiment towards autonomy.
the mess with elections is your fault, not ours. you ugrads do the same thing to us in student govt that you do in class. you cant be bothered to do your homework, to look something up before you ask a GSI to wipe your ass for you. its called a: b u d g e t. look it up. if you cant make a reasonable one and adhere to it, then dont come crying to us.
Comment by mano — May 18, 2006 @ 5:55 am
If the GA was actually trying for autonomy, you’d have a point. This year’s folks apparently decided that rather than autonomy, they’d try to integrate themselves further into the ASUC. I keep hoping that the GA will seek autonomy, but they disappoint every year.
Comment by Beetle — May 18, 2006 @ 9:45 am
i’m a grad student and i voted NO on the mou. f*ck the ga.
Comment by chet, the exploding CEO — May 18, 2006 @ 12:40 pm
To the grad students complaining about the GA, have you tried to speak to the GA delegate for your department about your concerns? Why don’t you try to be a delegate yourself?
Comment by Jim Fung — May 18, 2006 @ 1:05 pm
Due to the No on 54 scandal, I hereby support full autonomy of the GA to misuse funds allt hey want as long as they aren’t ASUC funds.
Comment by RepBast1984 — May 18, 2006 @ 1:39 pm
Yeah, our department doesn’t have one, as far as I can tell. Besides, since everything it does seems to be unanimous, it hardly seems worth the effort to join up to lose every vote.
Comment by Beetle — May 18, 2006 @ 2:10 pm
I heard the GA was split into several different opinions this year over the right approach to autonomy, so they were only unanimous on that after hours and hours of dicussion over several months.
I think your dissenting voice would probably a great one to have heard.
They only meet once a month and aside from that you’d also need to serve on some university committee of some kind, I think.
Still I can understand if you don’t want to do it. I had been thinking about it this year but didn’t want to commit to it since I already found myself behind on schoolwork and it was only September!
Comment by Jim Fung — May 18, 2006 @ 3:37 pm
who wants to be bent over a chair a reamed by jessica quindel once a month?
Comment by chet, the exploding CEO — May 18, 2006 @ 4:29 pm
ME! Actually every night would be nice.
Comment by Anonymous — May 18, 2006 @ 10:48 pm
Dean Holub is leaving the campus for a new job at the University of Tennessee.
Comment by I Have Gossip — May 19, 2006 @ 7:00 am
Isn’t Jessica Quindel off teaching school?
None of the graduate students really use the student government except for applying for funds for small events, such as coffee hours, which typically are quite different from undergraduate student clubs.
Comment by cp — May 19, 2006 @ 11:08 am
Yes cp, Jessica Quindel is a teacher and not a student on this campus any longer. Some people here are living in the past.
To me, you also seem right about how GA funds are used (although from what I can tell they also fund academic grants, not just small events). But yeah, it doesn’t seem like they use their funds necessarily more efficiently. I don’t see why graduate funds need to be spent on “coffee hours” or inter-departmental social things so much.
So I don’t think either or the ASUC or the GA are necessarily better.
Comment by Jim Fung — May 19, 2006 @ 11:41 am
Beetle is acting like the “bitch” of the undergraduate community again. Too bad I graduated before I could vote for it myself, but I can still gloat…
Suck it J-Council! Suck it Mike Davis! Suck it Beetle! Your undemocratic attempts to force this issue off the ballot have lost.
Comment by jonp — May 19, 2006 @ 1:01 pm
you didn’t graduate.
Comment by chet, the exploding CEO — May 19, 2006 @ 2:40 pm
1/3rd of the voters changing the Constitution is democratic?
Comment by Anonymous — May 20, 2006 @ 9:12 am
I’m very pro GA independence because they’re so annoying and stupid. If they’re independent, they can go screw things like no on 54 up themselves.
Comment by RepBast1984 — May 21, 2006 @ 8:16 pm