H -°, L 7° | Tomorrow: 
H 17°, L 4°
Of the 58 University of Wisconsin students who announced their candidacy Tuesday for the 2010 Spring Associated Students of Madison elections, nearly one third are members of a new student rights slate.
This year’s candidate turnout is higher than last year’s spring elections, according to Student Election Commission Chair Noah Pearce.
“It’s very exciting to see this many people involved in ASM,” Carl Fergus said, who is running for a seat on Student Council and senior class secretary.
A new student campaign for the elections called Madison People Organizing for Wisconsin Education Rights met atop Bascom Hill yesterday afternoon to announce candidates and a platform. Those students were also present at the ASM press conference where candidates announced they were running.
MPOWER’s three main goals are affordability, campus safety and greater support of student services.
While SSFC Representative and Letters and Science candidate Jake Burow said these are universal sentiments that all students look for on campus, MPOWER will focus on connecting students and student government to achieve their goals.
Burow said affordability can be increased if the tie between student government and students is strengthened, something he feels is missing in the current session.
He said there is a lack of true student representation in the current Student Council.
“The current make up of the student council is composed of students who showed up and were voted to represent the student body. If that isn’t representative, I don’t know what is,” ASM Chair Tyler Junger said. Junger is also running for reelection, though has stated he does not intend to run for chair again if elected.
There are 29 seats available for this election, and MPOWER has candidates for 20 of those positions in CALS, Education, Human Ecology, Letters and Science, Law and Medicine.
Not only will students be voting on who they want to represent them next academic year, but the NatUp 2010 referendum will also be on the ballot. If passed by 15 percent of the student body, up to $54.19 would be added onto students’ segregated fee bill once the new facility opens.
Burow said the members of MPOWER do not believe segregated fees should be used for capital building projects, such as expansion and renovation of the Natatorium.
“We want to protect the money we spend on education,” Peter Lorenz, current Academic Affairs intern and MPOWER Letters and Sciences candidate said.
Lorenz said one of MPOWER’s priorities would be to promote higher education affordability by actively lobbying to governments on the local, state and federal level.
“I think [MPOWER] has good intentions; however, they are misguided in how they intend to achieve them,” SSFC Secretary and current CALS Representative Matt Manes said. Manes is running for Student Council and SSFC through CALS.
Tina Trevino-Murphy, MPOWER candidate for Letters and Sciences and director of Campus Women’s Center, said the members of the campaign have not yet decided which of their candidates they would want for Chair of ASM or other leadership positions. This would be decided after the election results are in.
MPOWER was founded, according to Trevino-Murphy, by General Student Services Fund groups who met earlier this year, to discuss the structure of the GSSF; then, from there, the campaign evolved.
While the SEC will host meet and greets in Library Mall next month, The commission told candidates most of the promotion will have to come from the candidates themselves;
Ibrahim Raheem, a freshman running independently of any slate, said if elected, he would hope to serve the College of Engineering by promoting academic support to upper classmen who sometimes have trouble finding tutors for higher level coursework.
Raheem plans to spread his message by announcing his candidacy to engineering groups he is involved with and making posters.
This spring students will be voting on Student Service Finance Committee seats as well. Two seats are available for the committee and thirteen students are running for the seats.
Students can also be appointed to SSFC once they are elected to council.
Through the re-appropriation of seats, there will only be one seat for students in the School of Education and an additional seat in the Graduate School — a total of six Graduate School seats. Three students are running for the one seat in the School of Education, while three seats in the Graduate school could go unspoken for.
The ballot will open at 8 a.m. on April 12 and last until 5 p.m. April 14.
IP hash: 5302f41e
MPOWER! Kick those other people out of office!
IP hash: 383ef8e0
58 people for 29 seats- anyway to get the low-down on where these candidates stand on a few of the issues?
IP hash: a5f8ec00
It will be on the candidate matrix I’m sure, somebody should host a debate!
IP hash: 8c04d10e
A debate would be a good idea. Then we can see FACES 2.0 actually talk about how they plan on doing half the things they claim… without breaking the law.
IP hash: 6c4b29a3
FACES 2.0
IP hash: 6ac7847b
Does this group even have a political ideology to them? My understanding was that they were nonpartisan.
IP hash: ad7c3aae
Rallies and marches did a great thing for students when they froze THEIR tuition ten years ago. Now OUR tuition is double what THEIRS was frozen at. Self-centered and short-lived, that’s all this crap is. Let’s have some real solutions rather than this garbage.
IP hash: ad7c3aae
And seriously, this is a slate composed of GSSF groups who claim they’re going to lower your seg fees? GSSF GROUPS ARE PAID FOR BY YOUR SEG FEES! Put them into power an what incentive do they have to NOT jack up their own budgets at students’ expense? Hypocritical joke.
IP hash: 09f12402
You haven’t given anyone a chance to explain themselves.
IP hash: 82407099
For clarification: The Campus Women’s Center has nine coordinators. Tina is Program Coordinator.
IP hash: c9b43854
Which coordinator is in charge of CWC?
IP hash: e1ed177f
The CWC is run collectively by all 9 coordinators. No one is “in charge.”
IP hash: e0eb4ab1
M-POWER is the movement!
IP hash: 72fdf550
“MPOWER was founded, according to Trevino-Murphy, by General Student Services Fund groups who met earlier this year, to discuss the structure of the GSSF; then, from there, the campaign evolved.”
Oh I get it…someone is bitter that SSFC denied them funding so now they are running a slate to take over it. And they’re going to lower seg fees? About that…
IP hash: e1ed177f
Check their website—it wasn’t founded by the groups, but by members of several groups (and individuals have the right to act outside of groups). Besides, it seems like most of the candidates don’t work for GSSF’s.
IP hash: 7037a3d1
No NatUP from seg fees — no more Union debacles — donors and other sources are available for capital projects.
IP hash: e8ca833d
And guess what? If majority of (voting) students vote in favor, you’ll have a hard time stoping them.
IP hash: eed7dfff
NatUp and the Union are two entirely different projects, the student body needs to stop comparing the two. There will be an outreach to private donors if and when the referendum passes, but until then, everyone should understand the fundamental restraint of a private donor finalizing funding when the students haven’t even voted for or against the project yet. Think about it!
IP hash: 138687a4
Absolutely not. If the Union had never been built using an ill-conceived and illegitimate process that resulted in Badgers footing the bill for the next couple decades, then I would definitely vote in favor of a new Nat. The $50 or so bucks a semester is a drop in the bucket and it would clearly provide a benefit as the old Nat is almost dysfunctional (unlike the old Union South)
There IS a clear comparison between the two as they both are affecting our segregated fees. In a perfect world, it could stand on its own merits but we live in an imperfect one and therefore we must consider the impact on students footing the bill for two massive building projects.
Because of the new Union, I am voting no on the Nat Referenda. Can’t justify hiking our Seg Fee levy by that much so soon. It would be very irresponsible of us.