The Voice editorial board endorses Matt Wagner (SFS ’11) and Emmanuel Hampton (COL ’11) in this year’s Georgetown University Student Association executive election. Although incumbents Calen Angert (MSB ’11) and Jason Kluger (MSB ’11) have demonstrated strong leadership this year on a number of projects and proposed a promising agenda for next year, their indifferent support for the GUSA Senate’s Finance and Appropriation Committee’s takeover of the Student Activities Fee allocation process demonstrated indefensibly poor judgment. Wagner and Emmanuel’s strong opposition to the recent power grab, by contrast, sets them apart as the one pair of candidates with the necessary understanding of, and concern about, student club funding.
As the former chair of the senate’s Finance and Appropriations Committee, Wagner has an unrivaled knowledge of the funding process. Under his leadership, advisory boards and GUSA worked together in a collaborative, cooperative manner. Wagner pushed for much-needed reform of the Student Activities Commission without alienating the other advisory boards. This first-hand experience has given Wagner the ability to critically analyze current Finance and Appropriations Chair Nick Troiano’s (COL ’11) funding reform plan, which he has opposed as ill-conceived change. If elected, Wagner will serve as a much-needed check on the Finance and Appropriations Committee, and push to repeal the most irresponsible aspects of Troiano’s reform program.
Unfortunately, Angert and Kluger have not demonstrated this capacity for independent analysis of club funding issues. While they have been successful in realizing many of their smaller projects—such as creating a subsidized LSAT preparation course and starting a program allowing certified students to drive the SafeRides van—they have dropped the ball on funding reform, the most important issue GUSA has taken up this year. Instead of taking an active role, they passively allowed Troiano and other members of the Finance and Appropriations Committee to dictate the terms of funding reform.
It’s a pity Angert and Kluger have taken such an uncritical approach to such a central issue, especially since they have the proven ability to push their projects through Georgetown’s bureaucracy, as well as an appealing agenda for a potential second term. Wagner and Emanuel Hampton would do well to add some of Angert and Kluger’s most reasonable and actionable agenda items—such as installing more powerstrips in classrooms and implementing a Zipcar program for students under 21 years of age—to their already strong platform.
Great endorsement Voice. This sums up perfectly why Wagner-Hampton should be voted for. Not all the political bickering; because their platform will do the most good for students at Georgetown.
If anyone knows about “uncritical approaches” and “indefensibly poor judgment” it’s the Georgetown Voice Editorial Board!
So you picked the candidates who 1. almost failed to get a budget voted on by delaying and storming out of the room to break quorum and 2. the candidate who was forced to resign for not showing up in the first place? Smooth.
Reassuring that the Voice thinks Wagner’s greatest asset is being opposed to something.
I have to agree with J. Sims…Hampton was forced to resign from GUSA…
Yeah, the voice didn’t he even bother to address a lot of the criticisms of Matt and Emmanuel.
So, voice, let me get this straight: You admit that Angert and Kluger were effective in their roles by working their good ideas through GUSA bureaucracy, but to vote for Wagner-Hampton anyway because they opposed a particular aspect of a big issue…and, oh, by the way, Wagner-Hampton would be wise to take up some of Angert and Kluger’s new proposals.
oooooook…all in all, what a strong endorsement!
http://georgetownvoice.com/2010/02/18/as-gusa-election-nears-campaigns-get-heated/
Two guys who would stoop to the level of allegations of racism?
Talk about poor judgment.
This is not an endorsement. This is a continued bashing of the Finance Committee. Typical Voice.
I’d like to see Wagner get his bill through the Senate that changes the Funding Process back. Keep in mind he’ll need a 2/3s vote to do so.
“Wagner has unrivaled knowledge of the funding process.” ….HA
He has knowledge about the issue don’t get me wrong, but to say Calen and Jason don’t understand it is completely false. They had to sign off on the Funding Reform Bill since they are the current President and Vice President.
This has to be the worst endorsement I’ve ever seen. Who endorses a candidate and then goes on and on about how great of a platform and how great of a job the other candidate has done?
According to this endorsement of Wagner, Calen and Jason “have demonstrated strong leadership,” “proposed a promising agenda for next year,” “have been successful in realizing many of their smaller projects,” “have the proven ability to push their projects through Georgetown’s bureaucracy,” and have “an appealing agenda for a potential second term.” What kind of endorsement is that?!?
And to top off this “endorsement,” the Voice even advises Wagner to add one of Calen and Jason’s platform proposals to their proposal?!?
Also, I don’t know if I would call storming out of the room to stall the funding process “collaborative” and “cooperative.”
Serious question: did you interview or talk to anyone before making this endorsement?
“Under his leadership, advisory boards and GUSA worked together in a collaborative, cooperative manner. Wagner pushed for much-needed reform of the Student Activities Commission without alienating the other advisory boards.”
…And what did that get him? Here’s the big “reform” he “pushed” — from an email sent to Senators last year:
“[A] new committee would be created beginning next year, comprised of two GUSA representatives, two SAC representatives, and two rotating student club heads. [SAC Chair] Sophia [Behnia] has already agreed to implement this, as have Erika [Cohen-Derr] and Bill [McCoy], the administrators I mentioned just above.”
That was 100% of the change. The committee would choose the SAC Chair. The SAC Chair would then select all the members of SAC, by themselves. Votes would still be anonymous, groups would be unable to get lump-sum funding, there would be no appeals process, etc. The SAC Chair and SAC members would not have to run for election. No club leader would get a vote except “two rotating club heads” per year. And who would the two rotating club heads be? Well, with over 100 clubs, at two per year it would be fifty years before groups get a second shot!
The email also ended an implicit dig at Troiano:
3) The best and only way, therefore, to ensure SAC is more accountable to students is to work with Sophia, the new SAC Chair Aakib, and the rest of the Commission. The proposal we’ve got now, where we’d create a new selection committee, is the product of many hours of negotiation. Hard negotiation: Sophia and I tried to shout each other down a few times, and Tim and Sophia, who go as far back as high school, held a couple verbal battles as well. The committee proposal is the only way to begin reforming SAC. It is a first step, as I see it, and it shouldn’t be the last. But for the present moment, it is what is most achievable. We can discuss more drastic changes in the future, but for now I ask that everyone recognize the hard work we’ve put into making this happen – and that it is the best any of us can do.”
Huzzah! Well, at least Wagner and co achieved some measure of change through this historic push that the Ed Board raves about, right?
Oh wait, I forgot. SAC completely refused to follow through with this compromise and selected its new chair with 0 GUSA input and 0 Club input. Wagner achieved nothing.
So, nice job, Voice. You might as well have titled this endorsement, “Don’t give GUSA power over your funds, Part Three”
I’ll echo many of the previous comments. The Editorial Board is pretty clear that they see the current administration as unusually effective and having a clear, popular, and “appealing” agenda for a potential next year in office – but because they worked with the Senate as a unified government to help fix the broken funding system instead of working against them, they don’t deserve re-election?
Bizarre.
Does anyone even read the Voice? It seems like no one ever picks up their newspaper off the stand. I wonder why?
They are so obsessed with trashing GUSA that they evidently didn’t even bother to research, much less talk about, the candidate they endorsed. what trash. I’m not a gusa fan cuz they don’t do much, but come on.
no wonder nobody reads the voice
Looks like SAC has their own candidate in Matt Wagner.. SAC is like taxation with no representation.. they are a self-elected body, that doles out OUR money.. Wake up Georgetown…
No one really cares about GUSA, and the Voice does that useless institution a favor by even covering anything they do.