Along with the Student Government Association’s elections for president and executive vice president, students were presented with the option to voice their opinion on increased recycling, a more sensible drug policy, better sign-in technology, a revised guest policy, tuition freezes and giving students the ability to more easily opt out of paying into the Renewable Energy Fund (REF). Students overwhelmingly voted in favor of every issue.
The issue to garner the most support is, understandably, the tuition freezes. With 85 percent approval from students, it’s kind of a no-brainer. One would be hard pressed to find a Husky that would complain about the absence of a tuition hike. Unfortunately, a hike is exactly what undergraduates received. At the budget roll-out meeting last night, university officials announced a 3.9 percent tuition increase for the 2012-13 year. This raises an obvious question: Why have tuition freezes as a referendum question? It’s something the university isn’t likely to bend on, something students are overwhelmingly in support of – including an issue like this, where student input truly doesn’t matter, delegitimizes the entire referendum process.
But the other issues on the bill are fair, relevant and have a shot at opening dialogue between students and the administration. The referendum for a more sensible drug policy – 70 percent of students in favor – proposes to equalize the penalty for being caught with marijuana with the penalty for minors caught with alcohol. Obviously, from the average student’s perspective, any decrease of any drug-related penalty will be celebrated, but even from an administrative stance it makes sense. Right now marijuana possession on campus is tried as a level II offense, putting it in the same caliber as heroin and other more serious substance abuse. It would make sense to try marijuana on the same level as alcohol and save the more serious judicial courses for more serious crimes. Possession of less than an ounce of marijuana is a misdemeanor in Massachusetts.
The two residential life questions on the bill, revising the guest policy and better sign-in technology, both garnered 85 percent support. Long lines at peak hours and the sign-in circus that accompanies having more than three guests are common problems for students, but they aren’t dire problems and likely won’t be fixed.
Same goes for the sustainability issues: Increased recycling and giving students the option to opt out of paying for the REF. Sustainability is a great initiative and we should do all we can to support it, but it doesn’t quite follow that students can opt out of paying for environmental activism but can’t opt out of paying for their student body president’s paycheck. Opening the “you can pay for this if you want” door may start more problems than it solves.
If the administration chooses to act on any of these issues – and it’s still a choice, these questions only serve as recommendations for the university – students would be best served with action on the drug policy and tuition hikes, as these would affect all students equally and with more impact. Unfortunately, these are the two questions the administration is most likely to ignore.
