Thursday, March 6, 2008
Student Senate needs to stop accepting gifts from Kansas Athletics Inc. because doing so presents a conflict of interest between the Athletics Department and those whom the Senate is supposed to serve — the student body.
For at least the past five years, the student body president and vice-president have enjoyed unlimited access to a Memorial Stadium suite to watch home football games, courtesy of Kansas Athletics Inc. They have also been flown by the Athletics Department to another university to attend an away KU football game. This past season, President Hannah Love and Vice President Ray Wittlinger accompanied the football team and athletics brass to College Station, Texas to see the Jayhawks take on Texas A&M.
nutgraf
Kansas Athletics Inc., which is not technically affiliated with the University, receives more of Senate’s attention than most University entities. The $40 athletics fee is the second most expensive student fee, second only to the $105.75 Student Health Fee, which provides all students with a number of free medical services.
Associate Athletics Director Jim Marchiony said giving students access to the suit gives them valuable exposure to politicians, the media and other KU administrators, broadening their horizons and making them better leaders. As for the trip to college station, Marchiony said it provides the student representatives with chances to see other Big 12 schools and how they works.
Wittlinger wrote in an e-mail response that “this opportunity allows us to better understand the time commitment and experience of student athletes as they balance academics and athletics.” He added that they also met with the members of the Texas A&M student Senate to swap various program ideas.
Collaborating with other university Senates is a great idea, which is why there are at least two student governing conferences per year where executive boards of Big 12 schools get together and talk campus politics. Expenses for these events come out of the Senate reserve fund. The fall conference this past semester was at the University of Texas, only one week after Love and Wittlinger visited Texas A&M.
Learning about the competitive process and coming home with governing ideas that could’ve been exchanged just a week later isn’t worth creating a future situation where Senate has to choose between those who have hooked them up and the students they are charged with serving.
Love and Wittlinger are entrusted by students with the monumentally important responsibility of presiding over $18 million paid by students. They, along with their Senate, must allocate this money in a way that best serves the students. The current Senate has failed the students (and Senate’s own rules) by not passing a bill that would eliminate the $40 per semester women’s and non-revenue Sports fee, which sends $1.8 million annually to fund Athletics Department projects that aren’t open to all KU students.
This, along with accepting freebies from Kansas Athletics Inc., invites questions about who Senate is really answering to.
Kansas Athletics Inc., which is not technically affiliated with the University, receives more of Senate’s attention than most University entities. The $40 athletics fee is the second most expensive student fee, second only to the $105.75 Student Health Fee, which provides all students with a number of free medical services.
Some senators agree that the athletics fee is excessive.
“I think it’s vital for student Senate to have a relationship with athletics,” said Michael Wade Smith, freshman senator. “But not a $1.8 million relationship.”
Student-athletes deserve to be heard just as much as any other student group. But Senate needs to rethink handing out our money to a third party that generated $100 million in revenue during the 2006-2007 academic year.
To ensure Senate transparency, this discussion with the athletics department needs to come on neutral ground, not on a Boeing 747.
—Ian Stanford for the editorial board
Editorial Board: Athletic funding shouldn't fall on ...
The Women and Non-Revenue Sports fee was voted to be increased from ...
Fee continues amid controversy
Senate votes to continue $80-a-year charge to subsidize KU athletics budget.
Student athletes focus on Students of Liberty, ...
The debate revolved around Adam Wood’s proposal to cut women’s and non-revenue ...
Editorial: Chancellor should support Senate lowering nonrevenue ...
Compared to other student fees, the non-revenue sports fee is one that ...
Student Senate candidate talks about his party's ...
Adam Wood, Student Senate presidential hopeful, discusses strategies to help with dorm ...
Athletics fee not part of proposed cuts
Senators could cut $5 of $40 fee, but worry about possibility of ...
Student Senate notebook
Here's what happened at the Student Senate meeting Wednesday.
Student Senate to vote on fee increases
The Student Recreation and Fitness Center, Parking Department, Watkins Memorial Health Center, ...
Students praised for making boathouse a reality
Students and University officials endured snow Friday to celebrate the construction of ...
Women's sports funding kicked up a notch
Funding for non revenue and women's sports will increase by $1 million. ...
Letter: KU shouldn't rely on athletic funds
Just because the University could theoretically be funded by athletics doesn't mean ...
Editorial: Athletics shows support for academics with ...
Potential donation from the Athletics Department to the academics at the University ...
Student fees increase more than $35
In four years, student fees have increased 44 percent. They were $287 ...
Coalitions offer their platforms to campus
ConnectKU, Students of Liberty, and United Students hope to appeal to students ...
Campus fees generate more than $20 million
Student Senate finance committee reviews funds to determine what will might face ...
Boat subsidy keeps sports fee increases at ...
The athletics department said it won’t increase all-sports pass fees next season.
Students decide on transportation
An increase in student fees could bring free bus rides, expand the ...
Senators question student body president’s vetoes
The vetoed legislation concerns Gmail technology, a sustainability fee and the Multiculural ...
Editorial: Student voice needed in director search
A student should be included on committee charged with finding Perkins' replacement.
Battle of the brands
After the expiration of the University’s 10-year contract with the Coca-Cola Co. ...
Student Senate profile
Ray Wittlinger is the student body vice-president.
Student groups need new way to pay ...
The executive committee of the Student Senate passed a resolution to stop ...
United Students propose pool for Recreation Center
One coalition said the addition, estimated to cost about $20 million, wouldn't ...
Leaving a lasting legacy
As Hemenway prepares to retire, he and others look back at how ...
Kansan gives Student Senate grade report
Kansan Student Senate reporter Brenna Hawley graded the outgoing Student Senate administration ...
Student Senate leaders claim compensation under new ...
Six Student Senate leaders will receive between $1,500 and $3,000 per semester ...
Student Senate has 'most important meeting' of ...
The Student Senate dealt with line and block allocations and a student ...
Student Senate reviewing fees
To keep overall fees the same, some individual fees will have to ...
Senate finalizes funding recommendations
Some student organizations will see increases or decreases in budget.
Letter from the editor: Proposed cuts misguided, ...
The proposed cut to student media fees is wrong.
Campus elections 2009: Students of Liberty
A more sustainable campus, creating separation of power within Student Senate are ...
Student Senate works issues for this semester, ...
Many issues are works in progress right now for the Senate
No A&M reference in revised Student Senate ...
Senate bill no longer asks University officials to "admonish" Texas A&M for ...
Boathouse eagerly anticipated
No dates have been set to begin construction on the student-funded boathouse. ...
Know your Student Senate candidates
Learn more about the candidates for Student Senate
Student Senate Notebook
Student senators voted to increase fees for campus transportation and SUA, and ...
From left: Kimberlee Hinkle, Libby Johnson and Hannah ...
1 comment
Kansas Jayhawk fans hold aloft a reproduction of ...
2 comments
Erin Saupe, a Ph.D. student from St. Cloud, ...
1 comment
0 comments
Armed robbers continue to threaten.
3 comments
Lecture from Greg Mortenson, co-author of New York ...
0 comments
Comments
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
Is it just me or was it the students who passed the fee increase to fund women's and non rev sports? And didn't the Kansan Editorial Board recommend passing the fee increase 2 years ago as well?
You can believe what you want in regards to the relationship between Athletics and Senate, but the bottom line is that the students voted for the fee increase, not Senate. If the students want it removed, let's vote again on it this April!
Rides on the 747 and access to the suite did not bring Athletics $1.8 million, the students did (on the recommendation of the Kansan).
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
I think it is time for the UDK Editorial Board to start taking responsibility for students approving this fee. In April of 2006, this editorial board endorsed and instructed students to vote for this fee! And now they are saying it is Student Senate who is failing students? All Student Senate has done is uphold the vote of the student body. A vote the UDK told the students to cast!
All students at KU should begin to question the judgment and integrity of the UDK Editorial Board as they told students to vote for something and now tell the students they were wrong. I encourage all students at KU to beware of the UDK Editorial Board endorsement. If you follow their suggestion, they might just turn to you later and say, "What in the world were you thinking when you listened to us?"
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
The original referendum vote was approved on very shady grounds. First, the vote never should've happened because it proposed a measure that is against senate rules (senate is not supposed to give out money to projects that aren't open to all KU students). The existing election rules stated that no candidate could be present with a voter, but since it was not a decision for a candidate but an issue, athletics took every opportunity to expose the loophole. Donuts and Gatorade were given out to those who agreed to 'support women's sports'. KU celebrities like Julian Wright, Sasha Kaun, and Lew Perkins, as well as other athletes, sat with students at laptops set up on Wescoe and told them where to click. Many students were uninformed about what they were actually voting on. Also, 3000 students voted, which is roughly 15% of the undergraduate population . There are over 500 student athletes, who all would've obviously voted 'yes' on the referendum decision. Do the math: that's about one-fifth of all of the voters. If the referendum was narrowly approved (we'll say 1501-1499), then athletes would make up a whopping 40% of the yes voters! Obviously, it's not the athletes who are to blame for exercising their right to vote. The 85% of the student body who went unheard should've voted. But still, it's tough to argue that the students were represented in the referendum vote.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
Good comment chestnut. I believe it again confirms that the Kansan is incorrect in trying to blame this fee on Senate and Athletics relationship. There were many errors which brought about this fee. 1. It is against senate rules to give out money not available to all KU students 2. Many votes were illegally cast in violation of the Elections Code by having people view individuals votes.
3. Student apathy (no ones fault but the students) 4. The UDK supporting a fee they later will renounce
While there where many things that went wrong, none of them deal with Senate's relationship with Athletics.
I think this is a very tough subject and as I have stated before, let's do something about it, but lets do it in the proper channels which is having the students vote. . . having senate overturn what the students want is not the right action, regardless of how many votes were cast in 06.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
Even though he's right that it's the students (and the Kansan's) own damn fault on this one, I think richie09 just wants to keep his shot at those freebies from Lew open.
How's that pool that's been in planning for four years coming along, bud? Looks pretty to take credit now, don't it?
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
My freebies??? I must have missed those because I haven't seen anything. . . and I have nothing to do with the pool.
You must have me confused with someone that is in Senate or something, bud.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
Oh, I'm sorry richie. I was confused by you joining in Sept 2007 (right around the time United Students would have been caucasing) and commenting nearly exclusively on Student Senate articles, with a disposition towards athletics. All of this led me to believe you might be running for student body president.
Call me crazy!
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
You have done quite the research but still falsely accuse me of having anything to do with Senate, United Students, or the pool.
I have never been on Senate and will never be in Senate (I'm graduating). Please do not assume that because my opinions lean one way that I have some vested interest in these issues, because I don't.
You are crazy.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
So Oldgoldlegs, who are you? I've kinda taken a little bit of interest in student government lately, and I've noticed that you comment with usually the same slant on every article.
Also, judging from the fact that you're always saying random crap that I don't understand - I'm guessing you are in student government, or just recently left it.
So, level with us. Who are you?
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
Richie, if your opinions aren't based in some vested interest then why share them?
The fee never should have been posed, much less passed. There is a conflict of interest, whether it regards this fee or not.
Also, does someone on the editorial board actually edit, cause this story is plagued with typos.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
Gladly, hawks, I've got nothin' to hide.
http://www.connectku.com/wiki/index.php/Nolan_Thomas_Aquinas_John_Maximovitch_Witty_Jones
I think that link should hook you up with all the information you might need! Hope the Kansan staff is also taking notes!
Also, please feel free to edit that, or any other article on that wiki. I may be graduated, but I know a good thing when I see it-- and that wiki is gonna give my former fellow students some good stuff. And if you really do have a new interest in the ol' SS, contact me! I love helping anyone learn their way around Senate, whether or not I line up with them ideologically.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
But, stepping back a few comments, I do want to reiterate... Athletics has techinically followed the rules, and Senate followed the referendum voted on BY STUDENTS, and endorsed by the UDK. So... if you have an issue, talk to politely to Athletics, talk rudely to the UDK Editorial staff, and... well, throttle the guy next to you who probably didn't bother voting.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
I'll agree with that Mr. Witty, and reiterate, this has nothing to do with Athletics relationship with Senate.
If the Kansan would like to write an article about that, fine, but let's not intermingle two separate issues.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
End of the day-- I'm a lot less worried about the presdident and vice president of the student body getting "bought off" by Athletics via a few football games than I am about them getting FREE TUITION from the administration. Not saying the Athletics thing is all peaches and cream, but Senate has only so many dealings with Athletics. The Administration, however? THAT is MUCH more worrying.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
"I believe it again confirms that the Kansan is incorrect in trying to blame this fee on Senate and Athletics relationship." richie 09
The editorial doesn't assert that the relationship here is causal (the fee still exists BECAUSE of the freebies that the president and vice president receive), but rather correlational (the fee still exists AND the exec board accepts freebies from athletics). It argues that senate is acting irresponsibly by putting themselves in this situation, because doing so inevitably invites a certain amount of speculation that senate could avoid by not accepting these gifts.
Also, it questions the purpose of accepting trips to away football games. Wittlinger said that it gives them an idea of what athletes go through when preparing to compete and that it allows them to share idea with other student governments. Seeing what the athletes go through seems like a pretty bogus reason to me, and as the editorial points out, swapping ideas could've been done just seven days later at the student government conference at UT. There doesn't seem to be a valid reason for accepting this trip, other than the president and vice-president enjoying a relaxing get-away. There's nothing wrong with getting away, but it shouldn't come on the athletics department's dollar.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
The student body doesn't need the UDK Editorial Board or a few anti-athletics individuals to tell them they were wrong for voting the way they did. KU students are smart, informed, and independent thinkers. Don't let this editorial writer tell you how wrong you were to make your voices heard. In fact, the editorial board first told you to get out and cast that vote in favor of the fee! And now you are being called everything from wrong to tricked to irresponsible and uninformed. Don't listen. Keep voting and make your voices heard. Don't let the UDK Editorial Board or 80 some Student Senators reverse or shut out your voice.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
I'm glad that so many of you think that allowing a handful of women the chance to play sports like they could play at the rec anyway is more important than keeping student fees low enough for students who are paying their own way through college.
Editorial: Senate relationship compromises constituents’ interests
I recall a certain executive member of Student Senate calling the Kansan repeatedly last week, after catching wind of a less than flattering article being written about them, demanding that they pull the article and pretend that certain quotations made by certain coalition officials never happened. Maybe I'm just imagining things. Nah, this could never happen. Student Senate and their leaders are completely trust worthy. Right, KANSAN EDITORS?
Sign in to comment
Or login with:
OpenID