Despite the Daily Emerald's lack of coherence when it comes to their political cartoons, it has run two well-written editorials in the past couple of days that hammer at the ASUO Executive and other members of the student government.
The editorial from Tuesday criticizes the "double taxation" that is placed upon students when they buy a ticket to an event that is funded, full or in part, with incidental fees. According to the Green Tape Notebook, University students are eligible for free entrance to any student event that is funded with incidental fees. However, events such as "The Vagina Monologues" and "China Night 2004" have been charging students for tickets.
The ASUO Executive, Senate and the UO Ticket Office have done nothing to notify students of this rule and their right to free entrance.
Today's editorial discusses ASUO Vice President Eddy Morales and his involvement with the budget of ASUO Legal Services. Given the fact that Legal Services is currently representing Morales in his assault trial, it could be perceived that there would be a conflict of interest. When the Emerald raised that question with ASUO Spokeswoman Taraneh Foster, she told them that Morales had no role in the recommendation of Legal Services' budget because, "...he wanted to make sure that there wasn't a conflict of interest."
However, Morales' stance on the matter changed during a Senate meeting last week, where senators approved the Programs Finance Committee's budget recommendations. The Emerald has been closely following Morales' trial this term and -- incidentally -- has had to endure greater scrutiny of their budget than in previous years. The newspaper's budget was the only one of 120 that was vetoed by the Executive. The Executive also recommended that the Senate reject the PFC budget based in part because of the Emerald's budget allocation. When the Emerald Editor in Chief Brad Schmidt asked why Morales would not participate in Legal Services' fiscal analysis, but would be involved with the Emerald's budget, Morales responded by saying that he had not removed himself from the Legal Services' budgetary process nor had even considered the possibility of a conflict of interest. This directly contradicts what Foster said earlier.
Take a look and decide for yourself whether the members of this year's Executive have been handling their leadership positions in a responsible and honest manner.
posted by Sho | 3:21 PM |
