H 23°, L 4° | Tomorrow: 
H 21°, L 6°Over the past months, the Student Services Finance Committee and the Roman Catholic Foundation have waged a legal battle over denials of funding to the student group. It serves as the perfect example for a need to change the system that is in place to fund student organizations.
For those who are unfamiliar with the system, segregated fees are tacked on to tuition each semester. The total for this semester, at least for me, amounts to $430. The majority of this money goes toward fixed costs, such as administration, UHS or the student unions. However, 12 percent of the segregated fees are allocated to funding student groups.
SSFC, the funding branch of the Associated Students of Madison, allocates money to student groups that provide �non-academic but educational service to a significant portion of the UW-Madison student body.� Yet I feel students could muster some strong reasons to object to funding several of these student organizations.
The strongest case is against the RCF. Here is how they describe themselves on the SSFC website: �[The] duty of the Roman Catholic Foundation [is] to make the truth of Jesus Christ known to the students of the University of Wisconsin-Madison and assist them in their love and service of Him.� Personally, I have no desire to help fund an organization like this, and I�m sure many other students don�t either.
Beyond the RCF, which is a pretty regular source of fiscal outrage, there are other organizations that some people may object to. Some people might consider Sex Out Loud, the Jewish Cultural Collective, the Multicultural Student Center or any of the other organizations to be a spurious use of their money. Other students might prefer to donate all of their money to a single organization. I believe students deserve the chance to distribute at least some of their segregated fees according to their priorities.
The simplest way that I can think to implement this system would be to make it a voluntary process administered through the �MyUW� website. At the beginning of each semester, students could log on to MyUW and navigate to a page that presents them with a list of student organizations that are fundable through segregated fees. Students would select which organizations they would like to fund and how much to give them out of their segregated fees. The distribution of this money would occur after the selection period ended and take it out of the pool of allocable segregated fees.
Any students who do not choose to specify which organization(s) receives their segregated fees will have their money remain in the pool for student organizations to apply for. I see little choice but to leave the current system in place for distributing this money. The money left over should ensure that student organizations can maintain at least some level of funding.
Of course, each of these organizations should continue to have to submit budgets for approval by the SSFC to ensure that the funds are being spent according to established regulations. The SSFC would also still have to determine that student organizations are eligible to receive the money. This plan does not reduce the amount of oversight for these organizations.
Hopefully, this plan or a similar setup would help avoid the sort of legal wrangling that has gripped the SSFC and RCF. Letting the students decide what organizations should receive their money reduces the burden on the SSFC to strike some sort of balance among the groups. Furthermore, it might actually increase the chances that students would look into joining these groups. If students actually choose to give some of their segregated fees to a group � even if they weren�t involved in it beforehand � they might be persuaded to check it out.
The only real way to influence this issue at the moment is to hold a seat on the ASM Student Services Finance Committee. Clearly, this prevents most students from exercising power over where their segregated fees are spent. Allowing students to vote with their money rather than passively watching from afar is a far more democratic and favorable system than the current student organization funding process.
Let�s get to work.
Andrew Wagner ([email protected]) is a junior majoring in computer science and political science.
IP hash: c26e6050
Damn straight, son.
IP hash: a44fa017
Why, you could be the very first person in the history of ever to think up a checkoff system! Certainly no one has ever examined the idea before to see if it might in fact be illegal.
IP hash: bd0c25bc
12% of $430 = $51.60 … WOW! thats saving a lot of money. If you want an overhaul of seg fees look at the non-allocable portion like the UNION, SERF, UHS, etc. Quit complaining about a half slice of the pie when the rest of it is providing the problem. Once again, BH writers have no idea how the seg fee system works so they attack the things that get the most attention.
Of the $28 million provided through seg fees, the university decides about $25 million with minimal student input.
You want to lower seg fees, make it so students have more say in that piece and not the minsicule stuff.
Do some research before writing an article like this. This is not a representation of good journalism, research, or initiative.
IP hash: 835b4c01
RCF is a gross perversion of the system. There is already a “pooled system.” It’s called Finance committee, and they do travel and events grants. I’m not sure you understand the issues at play, Andrew.
IP hash: 446ef2e4
Do you even read the news? RCF and JCC didn’t get funding this year, so why use them as your example?
IP hash: 699fbcc2
That’s it! I’m starting a political party for ASM elections I’ll call it the Pail and Shovel Party. - Germain E. Stemme
IP hash: 59d04c75
That’s it! I’m starting a pseudonym for the Badger Herald comments board and I’ll call it the I’m Hilarious And Original Guy. - Germain Q. Stemme
IP hash: f940899d
$51.60 per student per year to student groups.
$192 per student per year for 30 years for the Union construction projects. 1,600+ students voted yes, which was enough to pass it after it failed twice.
That’s worth a lot more ink than $51.60. No scrutiny by students, no student oversight of the project. No clear understanding that most of that money is for tearing down and rebuilding Union South, very little goes to bringing Mem Union up to code (which is the leverage they used to pass it).
After raising $1.3 billion from donors for various UW projects they couldn’t get alums to pitch in for the Union?
Bah!