You have until 9 PM tonight to vote!
Tell your friends to vote NO!
Tuesday, February 24, 2009
PAVE Chair Outlines Constitutional Concerns
Today is day two to vote on the proposed ASM Constitution. In the spirit of informing voters, I would like to share some of my thoughts as a fellow student and as a member of an organization funded by Student Segregated Fees. First, this constitutional amendment is not a reform, it is an all out restructure. We need real reform in ASM. The problem with our student government is not its structure, but its current leadership. Second, a powerful executive branch will transfer power away from student committees. ASM was revamped eight years ago to be a grassroots organization in order to give students the space to exert their influence on this campus. Reverting to a top-down system changes the structure of ASM, effectively changing the role of student voices in our governing body. Finally, despite the quantity of listening sessions held after the constitution had already been drafted, students were not really engaged in the "reform" of ASM. Listening sessions were announced on the day of (one session announced via e-mail half of an hour after it had started) and did not provide meaningful space for students to provide feedback that was counter to the vision of the drafters. I think that if the Constitutional Committee had implemented what students have to say, we would be voting on a proposed reform to ASM that would not reinvent the wheel, that would propose changes to reflect what we have learned from the past and current structure of ASM, and would leave the agency of students intact. For the benefit of the student body and the future of ASM, vote "No" today at http://asm.uwsc.wisc.edu/
Ally Cruickshank
PAVE (Promoting Awareness, Victim Empowerment)
Ally Cruickshank
PAVE (Promoting Awareness, Victim Empowerment)
Monday, February 23, 2009
Sunday, February 22, 2009
ASM's Past
This is a really insightful article written back in 1999 (ASM's heyday) by Ben Manski, a leftist student leader at the time who is still very active here in Madison.
http://www.zmag.org/zmag/viewArticle/13329
This is a passage about ASM and its role in progressive activism that culminated in two sit-ins for student empowerment and against sweatshop labor in 1999 and 2000:
The fact is is indisputable: ASM was once a hardcore, effective grassroots organization. Founded by campus radicals back in 1994, the organization was designed to run political campaigns, which it did quite successfully on a number of issues (as outlined in the article above). It was the focal point for political action on campus in a way that is almost incomprehensible less than a decade later. Its many achievements include affirmative action advocacy, divestment from Burma, groundbreaking anti-sweatshop work and even a tuition freeze.
Hell, ASM even forced a Chancellor to resign. The 2000 sit-in featured 55 students, including the ASM Chair and Vice Chair, who chain-locked themselves to the Chancellor's office demanding sweatshop-free apparel and increased student control over the university's operations. (As Manski writes above, the sit-in and preceding movement were led and organized by ASM's Social Responsibility Campaign.) The riot police were called in and mass arrests were made amidst a large student protest. The student and local community loudly and actively opposed the Chancellor's actions, forcing his resignation soon thereafter. Before stepping down he committed UW to joining the Workers Rights Consortium, making it one of the boldest advances against sweatshop labor taken by any major American university at the time.
Aside from its structure, what made ASM a success at the time were the people who occupied its positions. For several years, the campus radicals - CAN, SPD, MCSC types - controlled a majority of the seats on the Student Council. The UNITY slate was the banner under which they operated.
As radical involvement declined in ASM, so too did the organization's effectiveness. As moderate students came to control the organization and made attempts to "govern" when not studying for their Poli Sci classes, ASM degenerated into the do-nothing body that we know today. Perhaps the last gasp of radical energy in ASM was the unsuccessful hunger strike for lower tuition in 2005. This was also the last year that progressive students ran a slate of candidates for the Student Council. Since then, the activist-progressive crowd has operated almost completely independently of ASM, to the detriment of both groups.
Since the Student Council has given up on what it was designed to do, it has become a joke - and now, conservative forces have found their opening. What we are currently witnessing with the new Constitution is really just the culmination of a multi-year conservative backlash - as symbolized by the recent logo change. If the other side gets their way, ASM will never again be the principal channel for campus activism.
For those who feel differently and want to return ASM to its roots, defeating the Constitution is a first and imperative step. I will join ASM members in congratulating the Constitutional Committee in rekindling interest in our student government. For the first time since I've been on campus, the left is actually taking an interest in ASM, operating as an organized force to change it for the better. Regardless of the result of next week's elections, the growing and energized campus left will be a force in ASM come this year, the next, and into the future.
http://www.zmag.org/zmag/viewArticle/13329
This is a passage about ASM and its role in progressive activism that culminated in two sit-ins for student empowerment and against sweatshop labor in 1999 and 2000:
"The Associated Students of Madison is the campus student association, representing the 37,000+ students of UW-Madison. ASM is a rank and file organization in the sense that every student is a member, and that all ASM campaigns and most committees are open to all students. ASM is led by an elected 33-person council, which sets policy and priorities for the organization, and allocates millions of dollars to student organizations and services. In 1998, the radical UNITY! slate won 16 of 33 seats on the Council. The new ASM leadership established the ASM Social Responsibility Campaign, which among other things, took a lead on the sweatshop issue.
ASM, as the campus student association, is unquestionably the most broad-based student organization at UW-Madison; it also has the largest number of members not only on paper, but also in terms of active members. The involvement of ASM leadership in the occupation meant that many students took part in the occupation that had never participated in direct action before. It also meant that the occupation had greater credibility with the Administration and the media as being an action that students in general supported.
ASM resources proved essential in ensuring the success of the occupation. Tools such as quality walkie-talkies, portable computers, cell phones, and megaphones were all readily available due to ASM involvement; the ASM offices and ASM staff organizers, along with the UW Greens Infoshop, served as the main base of support work for phone banking, web and email updates, media work, and so on.
ASM elections provided a forum for students to ratify or reject the goals of the occupation by referenda. Students generally showed their support for the goals of the occupation in the February 23-25 elections by passing the anti-sweatshop referenda with over 76 percent of the vote."
The fact is is indisputable: ASM was once a hardcore, effective grassroots organization. Founded by campus radicals back in 1994, the organization was designed to run political campaigns, which it did quite successfully on a number of issues (as outlined in the article above). It was the focal point for political action on campus in a way that is almost incomprehensible less than a decade later. Its many achievements include affirmative action advocacy, divestment from Burma, groundbreaking anti-sweatshop work and even a tuition freeze.
Hell, ASM even forced a Chancellor to resign. The 2000 sit-in featured 55 students, including the ASM Chair and Vice Chair, who chain-locked themselves to the Chancellor's office demanding sweatshop-free apparel and increased student control over the university's operations. (As Manski writes above, the sit-in and preceding movement were led and organized by ASM's Social Responsibility Campaign.) The riot police were called in and mass arrests were made amidst a large student protest. The student and local community loudly and actively opposed the Chancellor's actions, forcing his resignation soon thereafter. Before stepping down he committed UW to joining the Workers Rights Consortium, making it one of the boldest advances against sweatshop labor taken by any major American university at the time.
Aside from its structure, what made ASM a success at the time were the people who occupied its positions. For several years, the campus radicals - CAN, SPD, MCSC types - controlled a majority of the seats on the Student Council. The UNITY slate was the banner under which they operated.
As radical involvement declined in ASM, so too did the organization's effectiveness. As moderate students came to control the organization and made attempts to "govern" when not studying for their Poli Sci classes, ASM degenerated into the do-nothing body that we know today. Perhaps the last gasp of radical energy in ASM was the unsuccessful hunger strike for lower tuition in 2005. This was also the last year that progressive students ran a slate of candidates for the Student Council. Since then, the activist-progressive crowd has operated almost completely independently of ASM, to the detriment of both groups.
Since the Student Council has given up on what it was designed to do, it has become a joke - and now, conservative forces have found their opening. What we are currently witnessing with the new Constitution is really just the culmination of a multi-year conservative backlash - as symbolized by the recent logo change. If the other side gets their way, ASM will never again be the principal channel for campus activism.
For those who feel differently and want to return ASM to its roots, defeating the Constitution is a first and imperative step. I will join ASM members in congratulating the Constitutional Committee in rekindling interest in our student government. For the first time since I've been on campus, the left is actually taking an interest in ASM, operating as an organized force to change it for the better. Regardless of the result of next week's elections, the growing and energized campus left will be a force in ASM come this year, the next, and into the future.
Wednesday, February 11, 2009
Constitutional Developments
The Vote No campaign has recently received endorsements from MEChA, Sex Out Loud and the Teaching Assistants' Association, among others. From talking with representatives from these and other groups, it is clear that both political and nonpolitical student organizations and their members have a vested concern in defeating the new document. This is especially true of powerful groups like the TAA which can relate to the intended grassroots structure of the current ASM - and precisely what the revisions intend to destroy.
Several other groups are also sympathetic toward our side, but are reluctant to give an official endorsement to the campaign due to intimidation from at least one member of the Constitutional Committee. Given the almost complete lack of grassroots support for the Constitution, it's not a surprise that the Committee would have to resort to such tactics as making threats to group funding to curb the anti-Constitution momentum.
With a completely united progressive front against the Constitution, and with many non-progresive supporters as well, the Vote No Coalition looks exactly how an effective, grassroots movement on campus should: We are a large, democratic and diverse front of students who are connected to the organizational backbone of campus social, cultural and political life. Our side intends to achieve victory not through bribery, threats or backroom deals, but through a an energetic activism and confidence in the superiority of our arguments.
Several other groups are also sympathetic toward our side, but are reluctant to give an official endorsement to the campaign due to intimidation from at least one member of the Constitutional Committee. Given the almost complete lack of grassroots support for the Constitution, it's not a surprise that the Committee would have to resort to such tactics as making threats to group funding to curb the anti-Constitution momentum.
With a completely united progressive front against the Constitution, and with many non-progresive supporters as well, the Vote No Coalition looks exactly how an effective, grassroots movement on campus should: We are a large, democratic and diverse front of students who are connected to the organizational backbone of campus social, cultural and political life. Our side intends to achieve victory not through bribery, threats or backroom deals, but through a an energetic activism and confidence in the superiority of our arguments.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
