GUEST COLUMNIST: The reality of the UA referendum

The article "NEC decision to invalidate ballot raises controversy" (4/6/98), and the editorial in the same issue both fail to comprehend just how low -- in Scanlon's own words: to the "rock bottom" -- referendum supporters and the DP are willing to go to perpetuate dishonesty. We must remember that we are not in the world of modern political campaigns where, unfortunately, presidents will lie about their past and mislead voters to sway them to their agenda. We are in the world of academia, a place where truth is held to a higher standard. If an organization decides that it should extort voters by "requiring" them to vote for a referendum, lie to them about the money available and do so willingly, the subsequent referendum has little legitimacy and no place in a university community. The DP and others still can't comprehend that one of the reasons the referendum passed was because many students believed that their Student Activities Council groups would receive no funding as a result of the increase in the UA discretionary fund. This is an all-out lie and should be reported as such. However, given that few in the campus newspaper have a regard for truth, it is up to other individuals to ensure that the truth be known. The reality of the situation is that SAC has approximately $630,000 to allocate to its organizations. Even the $200,000 of the reserve fund will not be invested until after this year's appeal process (a direct contradiction to SAC's propaganda campaign). Therefore, SAC is in a fury about something that amounts to less than 5 percent of its budget. The InterFraternity Council and other parties opposed to the referendum did not stoop to the level of lying to persuade voters. We should not be punished for holding ourselves to a higher standard. The Nominations and Elections Committee exists to ensure fair elections. When two-thirds of the body decide that action has been taken to jeopardize that fairness, action is not only justified, but necessary. Students should be proud of the organization that seeks to have truth remain in elections, especially given that others are willing to lie to achieve their objectives. I am not astonished, however, that the DP would side with the dishonest. It has been clear from the beginning where the editorial staff and reporters stand on this issue. It is unfortunate that they abuse their power, but after all, there is no NEC equivalent to hold them accountable. It is time that the DP stop its smear campaign against Greek organizations and begin reporting the truth. But then again, maybe its staff agrees with Scanlon's comment that "it is not against the rules to mislead people."

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.