usac a love hate
DESCRIPTION
An essay covering USACTRANSCRIPT
Berger
Evan Berger
Professor Prescott
English 3
May 18, 2015
USAC: A Love-Hate
In my two years attending UCLA, I have hardly paid any attention to campus
politics beyond impassioned Facebook statuses and pandering—but surprisingly well-
designed—Bruinwalk handouts. Seemingly, the most negative campus controversies have
stemmed from the Undergraduate Students Association Council (USAC), our student
government. Two major parties, Bruins United and Let’s Act, divide the devout
community, akin to the Republicans and Democrats of the United States political system.
This year, the split grew fanatically torn during campaign season, resulting in falsified
accusations, defamation, and dissatisfaction among students. And while USAC does do
quality work for UCLA undergraduates, the community is too often noticed for its
negative controversies rather than its positive influences.
USAC is UCLA’s student government. Its primary purpose, according to the head
Daily Bruin USAC reporter Kendall Mitchel, is to represent both the student interests on
and off campus. The board is composed of fourteen council members that mimic the
United States’ governing system (with a President, Vice President, etc.), where each
elected representative has the opportunity to serve on the ASUCLA Board of Directors
and Communication Board. Despite the vagueness implicit in the phrase “representing
the students”, the board does decide where to allocate a ton of our money. Paying forty-
three dollars per quarter, every undergraduate student together collectively gives them a
1
Berger
total of two million dollars to spend on a travel budget, an academic affairs commission
for book scholarships, and a giant contingency fund (Mitchell). Furthermore, the
Undergraduate Student Association Council, much like the American government’s
Supreme Court, has its own judicial system. The Judicial Board (J-Board) reviews any
cases involving officers, commissioners, and other funding bodies with its own
Constitution and Bylaws.
With an election and judicial system in place, the board has been responsible for
impressive events around campus. USAC started the UC Farmer’s Market, the
Apartments Fair, and has funded countless others in the past few years. More recently,
USAC financed larger initiatives to promote great campus security, environmental-
awareness, and budget cuts with: Campus Safety Week, Ally Week, the Den Season Bus
Pass, and Bike to Campus Week. Their biggest most expensive events, Bruin Bash and
the Jazz Reggae Festival, are two of the largest general admission events for the student
body (USAC Committee). But perhaps more significantly however, USAC allocates
funding to student organizations that cater to the needs of smaller, less represented
communities at UCLA, which is in turn what makes the community so ardently divided
during campaign season.
Before elections began however—in one of the most notorious controversies in
recent UCLA history—USAC rejected Rachel Beyda, a Jewish second-year student, from
Judicial Council Board because of her religious identity. Four members of the board at
the time questioned how her religious views would conflict with her ability to form
unbiased board decisions. Outrage quickly spurred on and off campus, as the council’s
interrogative measures resembled prejudices facing Jews across the globe (Nagourney).
2
Berger
UCLA chancellor Gene D. Block, in response to the furious reactions around the country,
agreed, “To assume that every member of a group can’t be impartial or is motivated by
hatred is intellectually and morally unacceptable. When hurtful stereotypes—of any
group—are wielded to delegitimize others, we are all debased” (Nagourney). As evident,
Block’s opposition to the council decision and open disapproval suggests the magnitude
of USAC’s misguided judgment. The Judicial Board would later vote in Beyda after the
conflict subsided.
For the 2015 election season, the USAC ballot was split between two main party
slates: Bruins United and Let’s Act (as well as one satirical party titled “The After Party”
with the slogan, “Let’s Not Act”) (Frankel). Bruins United (BU) has been around longer
and was founded in 2004 with the premise of expanding the total number of groups that
could apply for event funding. In 2005, the organization filed a petition and lawsuit
against the university to allow Greek, pre-professional, and religious groups to be
considered in the application process (“Bruins United”). According to the Bruins United
webpage:
The belief in equal opportunity for all students was and will always be at the heart
of Bruins United. With a collective 17 years of USAC experience, this election
season, Bruins United is standing up for all students in support of fiscal
responsibility, leadership, and equal access.
Bruins United’s convictions this year were certainly not new, but the group maintained
that its long-running history provided greater credibility to take the house seats.
Let’s Act (LA) was founded on a very similar set of beliefs in expanding
representative power, but they upheld greater focus on historically marginalized
3
Berger
communities. Founded in 2013, LA claimed to spur change by “achieving diversity
through the recruitment and retention of underrepresented students” (“Let’s Act!”).
Accordingly, the party’s representative slate was comprised solely of minorities at
UCLA. This campaign season, the party’s emphasis diverged somewhat to touch on
recent issues in affordability, or specifically, the spiking tuition prices in the coming
years.
The campaigning in the USAC community resulted in a back and forth clash
between parties fuelled by denigration and accusatory tactics. Most considerably, an
anonymous (likely Bruins United advocate) submitted documents to The Daily Bruin that
revealed members of the Let’s Act slate illegally spending student fee funds on its
campaigns and actively selling marijuana and alcohol to raise revenue (Takteta et al.).
Kristine de los Santos, the Let’s Act campaign manager, wholeheartedly denied these
allegations, asserting that its submitter must have edited the documents to frame the
organization in a negative light. Moreover, the previously active transfer representative,
Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, maintained, “To be honest with you, I have never seen
anything like this before. It seems like publishing these documents was meant to be
malicious in intent” (Taketa et al.). Evidently, whether valid or not, the exposed
documents were publicized with a malicious, defaming resolve.
USAC has since been criticized for its lack of monitoring in campaign processes.
Writer and senior staff columnist at the Daily Bruin, Aram Ghoogasian, explained, “Even
if the Election Board’s subsequent investigation yielded enough evidence to take
action…the processes currently in place to monitor slate campaign activity are out of date
4
Berger
an ineffective” (1). He argued that USAC, through its poor supervision, enabled the
outcome of the elections to be influenced over unconfirmed accusation.
Let’s Act members too made false accusations of Bruins United candidates. On
March 27th for example, a Let’s Act member accused Bruins United of handing out
Redbull energy drinks in exchange for votes on the ballot (“USAC Violations”). After the
Investigations Committee examined the allegation however, they determined the
accusation to be entirely fabricated. In just the same week, another Let’s Act advocate
claimed that Bruins United candidates campaigned in unapproved locations—an
allegation that was also determined to be invalid.
Further controversy arose on campus when students and members of Let’s Act
accused Bruins United of homophobic mockery. The BU candidate for the Undergraduate
Students Association Council Financial Supports commissioner, Ruhi Patil, supposedly
made fun of a promotional campaign video made by Erineo Garcia, an open homosexual
(Shepherd). Garcia claimed the response video targeted him and his slate in a personal
way by poking at his feminine dancing and clothing (Shepherd). Soon after, Patil was
pushed to release an apology to any and all students who were offended by her jests. This
conflict further demonstrates the shaming and hostility reported during USAC campaign
season.
By the time elections were over, Bruins United had secured seven of the nine
contested positions, leaving Let’s Act followers devastated. Devin Murphy, the former
USAC President and an active Let’s Act advocate, said he felt robbed of representation as
a person of color. “This time is different, this time we lost our hope. I’ve never felt as
hurt as I do tonight,” he described on election night (Wang). Likewise, the LA candidate
5
Berger
for Academic Affairs commissioner, Kevin Casasola, explained how the results infuriated
him; he felt that voters made his issues as a queer Filipino seem irrelevant and
unimportant (Wang). Let’s Act supporters too felt overwhelmed with similar
disappointments, for as evident in the Daily Bruin election response video, many LA
followers were openly shaking their heads, tearing up, and some even growing
belligerently upset with the election’s outcome. Ultimately, USAC is a necessary
organization, but with the community’s political nature and followers so impassioned,
campaign seasons seem to end up more hostile than constructive.
Work Cited
Frankel, Jillian. Spring USAC Election to Feature 25 Candidates (2015): n. pag. Daily
Bruin. UCLA, 3 Apr. 2015. Web. 19 May 2015.
Ghoogasian, Aram. "USAC Must Close Loopholes Allowing Illegal Campaign
Fundraising." Daily Bruin. UCLA, 1 May 2015. Web. 21 May 2015.
"Bruins United 2015" RSS. N.p., 2013. Web. 19 May 2015.
Mitchell, Kendall. "The Basics of USAC." Interview. Audio blog post. DailyBruin.
UCLA, 7 Apr. 2015. Web.
Nagourney, Adam. "In U.C.L.A. Debate Over Jewish Student, Echoes on Campus of Old
Biases." The New York Times. The New York Times, 05 Mar. 2015. Web. 20
May 2015. <http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/06/us/debate-on-a-jewish-student-
at-ucla.html?_r=0>.
6
Berger
Shepherd, Katie. "Students Call USAC Candidate’s Parody of Opponent’s Video
Homophobic." Daily Bruin. UCLA, 20 Apr. 2015. Web. 20 May 2015.
Taketa, Kristen, Jillian Frankel, and Kenall Mitchell. "Leaked Documents Allege Illegal
Campaign Fundraising by LET’S ACT!" Daily Bruin. UCLA, 27 Apr. 2015.
Web. 19 May 2015.
"UCLA Undergraduate Students Association." UCLA Undergraduate Students
Association. UCLA, n.d. Web. 19 May 2015.
USAC Committee. USAC Selected Officers Accomplishments (n.d.): n. pag. USAC
UCLA. UCLA, 2014. Web.
"USAC Violations." Daily Bruin. UCLA, 2014. Web. 17 May 2015.
<http://dailybruin.com/usac-election-2015/#violations>.
"VOTE LET'S ACT!" Lets Act Committee, 2015. Web. 19 May 2015.
Wang, Angie. "Bruins United Dominates Council after Controversial Election Season."
Daily Bruin. UCLA, 1 May 2015. Web. 20 May 2015.
<http://dailybruin.com/2015/05/01/bruins-united-dominates-council-after-
controversial-election-season/>.
7