H -°, L 28° | Tomorrow: 
H 36°, L 27°After months spent tied up in the student government court system, a University of Wisconsin environmental advocacy group has exhausted its efforts to appeal decisions to deny it funding.
The Associated Students of Madison Student Judiciary panel decided the fate of the Wisconsin Public Interest Research Group’s funding by the Student Services Finance Committee by a vote of the justices.
Chief Justice Kate Fifield said the panel sat down with WISPIRG and SSFC representatives before discussing the matter internally for around one hour.
She said although the justices normally take a longer period of time to work on the panel’s official opinions on ruling, members decided to notify the parties involved before the formal opinion was released.
In the order issued by the panel, Student Judiciary ruled in favor of SSFC, affirming a lower panel’s ruling that Student Council should not consider the matter on the grounds of a violation to viewpoint neutrality.
The panel also issued an order to reverse the previous decision by a panel that SSFC had incorrectly interpreted the ASM bylaws in determining WISPIRG’s eligibility status, but the decision to deny the group funding was correct.
“SSFC was just doing their job and were correct to deny funding,” Fifield said. “From my perspective, the matter should be put to rest.”
She added the ruling of the appeals panel, which consisted of all Student Judiciary justices, is supposed to be final and called WISPIRG’s chances of appeal at a higher level “long shots.”
Former SSFC Chair Matt Manes said the organization’s only chance to further appeal the final ruling will be to take up the dispute with the chancellor of the Board of Regents, which will only hear the case if viewpoint neutrality could be demonstrated.
While Manes said cases have been referred to these higher bodies in this manner, he said SSFC has never denied a group and had the decision overturned in this process.
He said he was pleased the decision affirmed SSFC did in fact deny the organization correctly.
“It was good to see Student Judiciary recognized what SSFC’s role in this process is and that SSFC did in fact deny correctly,” he said.
The committee originally denied WISPIRG General Student Service Funds because their direct services had too many beneficiaries, among other reasons, Manes said.
WISPIRG Chair Rashi Mangalick said members of the organization were surprised to hear the appeals panel reversed its previous decision and were anticipating the release of Student Judiciary’s full explanation for the final ruling.
In the wake the notification by the justices, she said members were engaging in discussions with ASM Student Council members, WISPIRG board members and others to consider the next appropriate course of action, adding it remains uncertain whether the group will pursue a higher level of appeal for the decision.
“We want to get back to providing educational services,” Mangalick said. “We are still having budget discussions and trying to discuss what to do next.”
Fifield said the formal opinion written by the justices, detailing the rationale behind the ruling, would be delivered after final exams.
IP hash: 4bb3aa21
WISPIRG is a political organization, nothing more than a left wing organizing scheme, it’s about time somebody stands up and cuts their funding
IP hash: 2534469f
This is a ‘teaching moment’ and an excellent example of just how difficult it is to get the snout of a socialist organization like WisPig out of the public trough! They are squealing like stuck Pigs because their free ride at taxpayers expense (seg ‘fees’ are taxes) is over.
The similar squealing we hear from the other socialist special interest groups at the state level is no different. We must work just as determinedly to drive them from the public trough as well and achieve a smaller and financially responsible WI state government.
On Wisconsin!
IP hash: f36b3605
I wonder if you could highlight some specific aspects of WISPIRG’s “socialist” program. You mean, like, trying to reduce waste from water bottles? Give me a break.
IP hash: 2534469f
No more breaks and no more free ride, socialist. Pay your own way,WisPig!
IP hash: f36b3605
Does no one else find this kind of reasoning completely ludicrous?
“The committee originally denied WISPIRG General Student Service Funds because their direct services had too many beneficiaries, among other reasons, Manes said.”
IP hash: 5879167e
A criteria item is that University students must be the principle beneficiaries. It was originally decided that WISPIRG’s actions benefit more than just university students. That interpretation was overturn.
IP hash: 59d24194
Truth. That quote is misleading. It’s not that WISPIRG had “too many beneficiaries,” it’s just that not enough of them were students given that students were funding the services.
IP hash: 967fd0e1
No. Actually I don’t. Groups receiving student fees are supposed to be focusing on students and student-related issues. WISPIRG does not do that. Theoretically, since what they do helps the entire community (to the extent that you even agree with their political platform, which I don’t agree with all of it) they should be able to get plenty of funding from the broader community.
IP hash: f36b3605
I understand that GSSF funding is dependent upon a direct service to students. The direct service to students in this case is not the specific campaigns of WISPIRG. It is the resources they offer to students who want to learn how to affect the political process, and this takes the form of research, advising, professional training, etc.
WISPIRG is not being punished for providing a direct service to too many people, they’re being punished for the indirect effect their direct service generates, which is complete nonsense.
IP hash: 967fd0e1
Wouldn’t something like the Wisconsin Student Lobby be a more appropriate place for this seg fee funding to go then, rather than WISPIRG? They are a lot more student-focused, and actually focus on “students who want to learn how to affect the political process” instead of running ideological campaigns like trying to stop nuclear power plants. I imagine that WSL could do even more if they had the kind of resources WISPIRG has had in the past few years.
I do agree with some of WISPIRG’s platform, but disagree with other aspects of it.
Also, another thing, if WISPIRG is looking to save money and still exist as a viable student organization without seg fee funding, I would suggest that they start by getting rid of their obnoxious canvassers who have been constantly asking people “Do you have a minute for the environment?” for at least the last 7 years, and who go to the lengths of chasing people down who are explicitly trying to avoid them. If these people are unpaid volunteers, I would suggest that you still stop this practice. You are alienating a lot of people who might otherwise support your organization, including me.
IP hash: 89f45c6c
I think WISPIRG needs a weineken!