asucIn what turned out to be a not-so-close race, CalSERVE swept all four executive positions in the ASUC elections. Roxanne Winston won for president, Krystle Pasco is the new executive vice president, Dionne Jirachaikitti prevailed in the external affairs vice president race, and Carlo de la Cruz will serve as the academic affairs vice president come fall semester. But, lest we forget, there’s a bummed loser for every shining victor bedecked in laurel leaves and busty women. Student Action failed. The SUPERB referendum also failed. Sorry, guys.

According to preliminary tabulations, Student Action did much better in the senate, where they landed eight seats. Eight of CalSERVE’s senators also placed. The co-ops managed to shoehorn in one representative, as did Squelch and the Berkeley College Republicans. Matt DeMartini won the student advocate post, which pretty much goes without saying.

Our trusty Daily Cal news source says that the last time a single party controlled all four VP positions was during the 2006-2007 term, when Student Action had the cast-iron monopoly on the executive offices. Ah, how the tables have turned.

CalSERVE Sweeps Executive Offices in ASUC Elections [Daily Cal]



Comments:
ass said:
Apr 15, 2008 at 10:38 pm

the race for president WAS CLOSE.



henry said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 12:28 am

and how unfortunate that we have someone representing what is far from the interests of the student body as a whole as the president.

get ready for more tree sitters, people–with ASUC backing!



anon said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 9:14 am

I’m what should be considered a typical CalSERVE supporter: resident of a co-op and a Filipino.

But I’m disgusted by Winston’s victory:

“[H]er senate record suggests a tendency to direct her energy toward pet causes. While Lee was instrumental in implementing Spring Welcome Week, Winston’s most notable piece of recent legislation was a resolution in support of ‘total amnesty’ for the Wheeler Hall tree sitter.”

- Daily Cal endorsements

Did we seriously vote her in? The presidential race was very close – sources have told me as close as 13 votes. Lee definitely deserved to be president.



Disney Dillinger said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 9:55 am

It’s a shame the voters did not let the Superb Referendum pass.

How are we supposed to have PROPER entertainment if we’re not willing to pay for it?

UCR has Spring Splash every year and they just had Moby, Mos Def, Clipse, and Girl Talk at HEAT two months ago!
UCSD has Sun God every year.
UCI had Kanye like two years ago.
UCSB gets to be UCSB.

But what do we get?!?! We try to make ourselves feel better about ourselves by repeating how we’re the #1 UC. Why?!?!
Because the girls aren’t hot? or because everyone else is trying to lower your grade?

All we get is the Counting Crows! And then you all had the audacity to say, “If Superb really needed our money, then how could they afford the Counting Crows?” As if booking the Counting Crows was costing us another South Asian Research Station that we’ll never see! WE DON’T NEED ANOTHER NEW LIBRARY! WE NEED KANYE! (or other legitimate act)

Here’s where I’m coming from, if you give the money to the Filipinos, then it gets spent on Filipinos. If you give it to Koreans, they spend it on Koreans. If you give money to BCR, then it only goes to the Republicans.

If you give money to Superb, then they get to put up movies and concerts for ALL STUDENTS! (and if you say that you haven’t been to their movie screenings, then that’s your own fault, especially when they are showing FREE movies)

The argument that “Superb thinks they’re special” is played. It isn’t as if they’re catering to a a very narrow and specific community.

The irony is that we complain about how much there’s nothing to do here and then we go vote against our own fun.

That’s no better than demanding better health care but not willing to raise the taxes.

We couldn’t cough up $5 for concerts?

Seriously?

-Mickey Mouse



Beetle said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 10:09 am

I realize that SUPERB supporters live in a bubble of sorts, but not everybody enjoys concerts and the like, so no, it doesn’t go to ALL STUDENTS, it goes to students who have that particular interest. Just like every student group’s money. Any other group could say it’s your own fault for not being interested in their events.

You couldn’t charge $5 for concerts?

Seriously?



Beetle said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 10:11 am

By the way, while relatively close, the presidential race was decided by 235 votes. The 13 vote margin was before drops, and meaningless in terms of who won.



Christopher Page said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 11:12 am

The last time one party controlled all four political executive offices (president and three VPs) was indeed 2006-2007. It should be noted that year CalSERVE ran no executive candidates so Student Action did not have a huge organized opponent for the executives. There were two formidable non-major party candidates, including Igor who lost by only 219 votes for EAVP. The last time a major party swept the four executive spots against the other one was when SA did for the 2005-2006 year.



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 3:34 pm

The reason that SUPERB got killed was that the ASUC senate, in its wisdom, decided against letting the graduate students have any say over how their part of the fee gets spend. We would have paid a lot of the fee, but we really don’t care about SUPERB much, and in fact hate the stupid Friday rock concerts. An amendment to accommodate these concerns was considered by the ASUC senate, and killed.

Thus the GA worked to kill the referendum, the Union sent out a mass email opposing it, and grad students voted against it heavily, certainly making up a NO block larger than the margin of 112 votes.

Maybe the ASUC senate will think again before using graduate students as an ATM machine.



ass said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 3:38 pm

Scott,

It’s hillarious that you are blaming the ASUC Senate.

The Senate merely allowed the fee to be put on the ballot. And it was a good decision on the Senate’s part, since clearly a lot of students voted in favor.

The authors of the fee are to blame. They chose not to include graduate students adequately, and as such, they didn’t get enough votes to win.



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 3:43 pm

ass,

You may be right, perhaps I am not spreading the blame around proportionally. The authors are certainly to blame, too.

However, the senate did kill an amendment which probably would have caused the (individuals who happen to also be leaders of the) GA to withdraw its opposition, or at least not be so fired up to turn out votes against it.



ass said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 3:48 pm

the authors should have encouraged the Senate to SUPPORT that amendment.



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 3:55 pm

Yes, I agree, that would have been the smart thing to do. But they didn’t, presumably because they wanted our money and thought that grad students wouldn’t be motivated to turn out.

So they lost by 112 votes.

Oops.



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 4:00 pm

Continuing, look at the March 12 minutes– from the guest announcement portion:

“Ms. Allbright said the first Guest Announcement was from Abby Valladares, speaking on the SUPERB Referendum. Ms. Valladares introduced herself and said she was a Graduate Assembly delegate, there to speak on an upcoming student fee referendum by a group called “SUPERB.” She understood the group did a lot of events on campus and was trying to hold a referendum to increase fees in order to fund its programs. She also understood that initially, the referendum had language in which a certain amount of money would go back to graduate students, via the GA. For whatever reason, that part of the referendum has been struck. So as it stood, the referendum would raise money through a fee increase of all students, including grad students, but grads wouldn’t get a single cent back.

“Ms. Valladares said that prior to two days ago she had never heard of SUPERB, and it was her belief that most graduate students didn’t know what it was, or what it did. She thought the functions it put on were possibly concerts on campus. They were neither tailored to graduate students nor of interest to the GA. She couldn’t really ask for the referendum not to go forward, but she was requesting that the Senate con¬sider putting back the original language that would allow some of the money to go back to graduate stu¬dents. As she understood it, the money raised from grad students would be $60,000, but they wouldn’t see a single cent of it. She would ask that some money go back to the graduate students. She wanted to thank them.”



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 4:02 pm

….

“Continuing Guest Announcements, Ms. Allbright said the next speaker was Bradley Froehle, speaking about the SUPERB fee increase. Mr. Froehle introduced himself and he was first-year graduate student in the Mathematics Department. He would like to speak about the SUPERB fee increase. As a graduate student, he has certainly never heard of SUPERB, and he didn’t think his friends ever heard of it. He’s never been to a SUPERB event, never received any e-mails telling him about its events, and has never seen any fliers advertising it. So he felt like it would be unfair to the graduate student body if they had to pay fees to a student group that didn’t serve its needs. Rather than have that money from grads go to SU¬PERB, he thought it would be fairer if the money raised went towards supporting actual graduate student events, for the GA to dole out or to support graduate student groups in some other fashion.”



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 4:48 pm

Here is Josh Daniels, the GA president, before the Senate (from the minutes, 3/12). If you want to know why SUPERB died, just this:

“Ms. Allbright said the next speaker was Josh Daniels, regarding SUPERB. Mr. Daniels said that if a stu¬dent paid a fee, they should have equal access to the services that fee provides. SUPERB might seem like it was equally accessible to all students, but it was set up, was created, and advertised things that under¬graduates enjoy and benefit from, much more than graduate students. It was part of the dynamic of graduate student life on campus. He appreciated the effort by the Co-Chairs of SUPERB to include a grad student-focused unit of SUPERB, but he thought that was an attempt to fit a square peg in a round hole. SUPERB wasn’t set up to really cater to the needs of graduate student entertainment. Another benefit that would go exclusively to undergrads in the proposed referendum was that it would free up $100,000-plus to give to undergrad student groups. That was money that grad student groups don’t come to the ASUC to apply for.

“Mr. Daniels said the suggestion he would urge to the proposed SUPERB fee was an amendment to include in the language a portion of the fee that was initially present, which would have had money go to graduate student groups so that all students could benefit. If the Senate wanted to be fair to all students and represent all students’ needs and concerns, there had to be something the referendum that all students could benefit from.

“Ms. Patel asked if he was aware that the bill was amended to create a department that included grad stu¬dents. Mr. Daniels said he was, and that was his reference to a square peg in a round hole. SUPERB was set up was to do campus-wide events, and grad students related to campus was through departments. The amendment was better than nothing, but he didn’t think that would work well with this model, given that grad students would be paying $60,000. It would go towards supporting entertainment that grad students didn’t really attend. Grads would probably prefer to spend that money on enhancing grad student groups and life in their departments. He appreciated the effort to mix in grads’ needs, but he didn’t think it was sufficient to really address the core concerns.

[...]

“Mr. Wu asked if he believed there were a significant number of undergraduate students who were not served by SUPERB and wouldn’t benefit from it getting ASUC funding. Mr. Daniels said the referendum was structured to be equally accessible to all undergrads, via ASUC funding and SUPERB. But it wasn’t structured to have equal access to grads due to the types of events SUPERB put on and the way undergrad groups apply to the ASUC and grad groups apply to the GA. Structurally speaking, the Referendum wouldn’t provide grads with the same opportunities as undergrads.

[...]

“Mr. Daniels said he didn’t want to predict what would happen in five or ten years. They can try and twist what SUPERB currently was into something that offered services equally to grads, but he thought that would be extremely difficult. He didn’t know SUPERB well enough to know how easy that would be. But referenda should offer equal opportunities and be fair to all students. Again, 95% of grads would probably choose to have grads’ $60,000 go to grad-run events rather than SUPERB events. What would guarantee fairness and most meet the needs of grad students who pay the fee would be to fund grad events with their portion of the fee…

“Ms. Patel asked if grad students might change how they relate to SUPERB if they understood SUPERB and the resources it could provide to grads. Mr. Daniels said he was sure there would be an improvement, because right now it was practically nothing. But he didn’t think it would be $60,000 worth of improvement. The referendum was an attempt to cater SUPERB to grads, and he didn’t think it would fit. What would fit was to allocate some of the fee to grad events. He didn’t think they could twist SUPERB enough to maintain its current character and at the same time serve grad students at the amount the referendum would call for.

“Mr. Shams asked how many grad students voted in ASUC elections. Mr. Daniels said he’s heard that 21% voted in the spring ’06 election, and 14% voted in spring ’07.

[...]

“Mr. Silver asked if Mr. Daniels would go on the record as being in support of the referendum if the Sen¬ate moved forward with language he’d like, and if he would support it. Mr. Daniels said he would be in support as a grad student. As GA President he could not take a position, and the GA couldn’t take a position, as that was against the ASUC Constitution and By-laws. But he would attempt to mobilize grads to vote for it and he would campaign for it…”



ass2 said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 4:56 pm

that amendment looks like bullshit. Money for entertainment would just go into grad student groups (that most grad students prob don’t even care about). That would have been a waste.



Scott Armstrong said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 5:05 pm

One of the selling points of SUPERB was that it would free up $100,000+ to student groups. The problem is that while Grad students paid $60,000 of the fee, $0– ZERO– of the “extra money for student groups” would have gone to graduate student groups, who cannot apply through the ASUC. The amendment would have given some money to the GA– to whom graduate student groups must apply.

Making the SUPERB thing fair to grads is difficult, since we hate SUPERB, and Josh’s amendment wasn’t perfect. But, Christ, at least give us our money back. That was the point of the amendment.

It failed.

And thus so did the SUPERB Referendum.



ass2 said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 5:14 pm

the amendment was a waste of time.

you guys should have just voted down the fee no matter what…

anyway you look at it it benefits undergrads at the expense of grads.



2girls1cup said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 11:32 pm

poop



2girls1cup said:
Apr 16, 2008 at 11:34 pm

and by poop, I mean student action is poop.

I voted for superb because I like the concerts and think other people should too. Ratatat and Zion-I were f-ing tight.



Manny said:
Apr 17, 2008 at 1:21 am

I am glad the Superb fee failed.

When I was a student, we pushed for the RSF fee referendum with the GA because the alternative was a deteriorating RSF and increasing membership fees. The fee provided a guarantee of sustained funding from the university as well. That fee was an investment.

Fees like the Superb fee are more like giving money to a special interest group. I am not saying that Superb is not important but it needs to find a way to sustain itself to be successful.



Hollinger Greumsfeld said:
Apr 17, 2008 at 11:33 am

Who’s special interests would the referendum exactly be serving? The Asian Business interests? the Cal Objectivist Club’s interests? The undergrad interests? WTF is graduate entertainment, anyway?

I think you’re right that Superb needs to find a way to be sustainable. The only way I see that happening is to make a profit on a really good concert, that students are willing to pay for. The problem with that is Superb does not have money to pay for a GOOD act.

The alternative to the SUPERB referendum is another year of subpar entertainment, and just another excuse to say “SUPERB sucks anyway, why should I give it more money?”

Riverside charges $60 a student for their entertainment. And is still able to put on both free events and concerts that people are willing to pay for, on top of the 60 they are already paying.



ass2 said:
Apr 17, 2008 at 12:44 pm

HA

And Riverside is certainly comparable to Berkeley!

The difference of student life between Riverside and Berkeley is astronomical.

At Riverside if they don’t pay $60 there will probably be absolutely nothing for students to have fun.



Manny said:
Apr 17, 2008 at 9:01 pm

There are just other priorities that I think the students need to focus on. SUPERB has always been a great organization but I dont see how a fee will help all students.

On the other hand, we need to think about lower sproul and how that will be built. If we say that the university needs to pay for it, then thats fine but we better be ready to fight for student control of the space when we have little claim for it.

If it is paid (even partially through student fees) then we have a claim that it should still be under student control since students built it.



mike said:
Jan 18, 2009 at 8:44 am

rtPANI hi! how you doin?



Prawo jazdy Krosno said:
Mar 21, 2012 at 8:35 am

I have really learned newer and more effective things via your site. One other thing I would like to say is the fact that newer laptop or computer os’s usually allow additional memory to be utilized, but they also demand more memory simply to function. If one’s computer cannot handle extra memory as well as newest program requires that memory increase, it usually is the time to buy a new Laptop. Thanks



Talisha Kath said:
Mar 21, 2012 at 2:11 pm

i was beginning to feel i may possibly maybe finish up getting the only lady whom assumed about this, with the extremely least at present i realize i’m not weird :) i’ll make sure you test out a range a variety of blogposts correct right after i get somewhat of caffeine in me, cheers :)



Thora Seidel said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 12:27 am

Can I simply say what a aid to seek out someone who truly is aware of what theyre talking about on the internet. You undoubtedly know learn how to deliver a difficulty to gentle and make it important. More individuals must read this and perceive this side of the story. I cant imagine youre no more in style since you undoubtedly have the gift.



Forex Indicator said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 2:19 am

Regards for helping out, good information.



video said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 5:16 am

Thank for sharing awesome informations ! Keep it up ! Watch funny video : http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WDzy2rZp4a4



mydirtyhobby said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 6:12 am

Undeniably believe that which you said. Your favorite reason seemed to be on the net the simplest thing to be aware of. I say to you, I definitely get irked while people think about worries that they just don’t know about. You managed to hit the nail upon the top as well as defined out the whole thing without having side effect , people could take a signal. Will probably be back to get more. Thanks



air mouse said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 7:12 am

At this time it seems like WordPress is the preferred blogging platform out there right now. (from what I’ve read) Is that what you’re using on your blog?



HALI YIKAMA said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 9:38 am

Great…



bloom098 said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 1:27 pm

very good i havent read such a high quality peice of work in a long time good job. The text flows very nicely and it is very easy read and it was also fun and broght up some interesting points.bloom



Penis Enlargement Pills said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 4:26 pm

Great ¡V I should certainly pronounce, impressed with your web site. I had no trouble navigating through all the tabs as well as related information ended up being truly simple to do to access. I recently found what I hoped for before you know it in the least. Reasonably unusual. Is likely to appreciate it for those who add forums or anything, web site theme . a tones way for your client to communicate. Excellent task..



Louis Killings said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 4:47 pm

There is noticeably a bundle to know about this. I assume you made certain nice points in features also.



Forex ea said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 6:36 pm

Really excellent information can be found on web site.



Transgenic Mice said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 9:02 pm

Excellent post. I was checking continuously this blog and I’m impressed! Extremely useful info specially the last part :) I care for such information a lot. I was looking for this certain info for a long time. Thank you and best of luck.



Mal Malloy Booty said:
Mar 22, 2012 at 9:51 pm

Good day! This is my first visit to your blog! We are a team of volunteers and starting a new project in a community in the same niche. Your blog provided us valuable information to work on. You have done a marvellous job!



Rosemarie Bertinetti said:
May 16, 2012 at 8:11 am

Thx for information.