Where Do Your Student Fees Go?
By Josh Siegel • September 29th, 2008
The ASCMC Budget Committee met last Friday afternoon to go over retained earnings from last year and make final allocations. The budget for this year is summarized in this PDF file.
The fine print:
- The numbers listed are final allocations as of today, but the budget committee may meet to change allocations later this year.
- Income is not listed, but the primary source of income is student fees. Peripheral sources of income include yearbook sales, ticket sales for events, t-shirt sales, Amazon.com textbook commissions, etc.
- Many of the allocations (such as Senate, dorm budgets per person, etc.) are constitutionally mandated. For more information, see the ASCMC constitution.
- The “band fund” is reserved for a case in which ASCMC is able to bring a big performer to campus later this year. If it isn’t used, the balance will be allocated to other ASCMC activities.
- ASCMC has never and will never use revenues from student fees to pay for alcohol. It’s prohibited in our constitution and against the law.
- Club budget requests can be found here. The budget committee allocated funds according to club budget requests, presentations, number of active members, past performance, and other related considerations. If you have questions, please contact me.
- Last week College Republicans received a $500 donation from an alumnus in addition to the $90 listed.
- If something seems ridiculous, ask someone or post a comment here. There’s probably a good explanation for it.
Loading ...
Clear, and 42 ° F.
September 29th, 2008 at 1:48 am
Why does ASCMC give any funding to the Portside when doing so opens them up to liability and is of little benefit to the student body?
September 29th, 2008 at 10:33 am
There’s zero liability there. Quit bitching.
September 29th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
“of little benefit to the student body” hahahahahaha.
October 2nd, 2008 at 1:12 am
Maybe the Editor-in-Chief of this highly esteemed doesn’t know the history of the lawsuit that almost occurred in which the Claremont Institute threatened to sue The Claremont Portside through the ASCMC which funds them. Here is your link. http://www.cstudent.org/issues/2004/april/news/portside/
Here are your paragraphs from the Claremont Student.
“The Claremont Institute, rather than Harry Jaffa himself, will bring charges against CMC’s student government (ASCMC) if they decide that legal action must be taken. According to Institute Research Assistant Grant Winthrop, the Claremont Institute feels that the article has damaged their credibility because they were labeled as an Institute guilty of hate crimes against homosexuals (www.hatecrime.org lists CI as an organization which delivers hate speech). Winthrop adds that when an author prints an anonymous quotation, the author becomes responsible for what is said. Jaffa denies that he ever said that homosexuals should be shot, and the Claremont Institute believes that thePort Side did not investigate the validity of the accusation prior to printing it. Since the Claremont Port Side is funded by ASCMC, ASCMC is legally accountable for the content of the newspaper and therefore a lawsuit would be brought against the ASCMC rather than the Port Side itself.
Professor Jaffa says that he is not interested in the money that would be gained by legal action, but asks: “If they refuse to retract slander, what other recourse do I have?” Winthrop says that he “sincerely hopes to avoid legal action because then lawyers and courts win, not people.” He adds that legal action would not achieve much and is optimistic that ASCMC will agree with the Claremont Institute after an investigation and that the statement will be retracted without a legal battle. ”
I think an apology is in order for “bitching.” Do your homework next time.
October 2nd, 2008 at 6:57 pm
Wow, CJ, I’m so incredibly impressed by your astute knowledge of ASCMC’s legal history. That skill will take you far in life, I’m sure, just like your daily arrogant rants attacking students and others who, for better or for worse, are convinced that they are making a difference in the world. When I complain I about your “bitching,” it’s mainly because I’m hoping that this site attracts more dynamic, thoughtful dialogue on issues specific to CMC. Of course there is room for improvement, but no apologies are necessary.
October 2nd, 2008 at 8:14 pm
I see the Editor-in-Chief of this publication is more content to sling ad hominem attacks than to delve into the history of the Port Side and how we might all be jeopardized by their public funding, which I have shown. Mr. Boomer insists that we “have zero liability,” but he is, wrong, of course.
An apology would be nice, as I do contribute, in part, to his much compensated salary, but I don’t think I’d get it, content though the Editor is to sing the praises of students who make a “difference in the world.”
When someone asks a question, they are called “bitching.” So much for “dynamic, thoughtful dialogue”!
Now would you care to answer my question? Or not? Why does ASCMC fund the Claremont Port Side? Why can’t it raise money on its own like the CI and (to a lesser extent) the Forum?
October 2nd, 2008 at 8:33 pm
Haha. Good times. I’m going to go collect my giant salary and donate it to Greenpeace.
xoxo
The Editor
PS - Keep posting, actually: it increases readership!
October 2nd, 2008 at 8:40 pm
Don’t mention it, Ross, though it is a shame that the only protests you can make are sarcastic.
I hope you enjoy donating to Greenpeace. (I was worried there that you would actually “make a difference”!)
October 3rd, 2008 at 9:59 am
Paul Anka: To stop those monsters 1-2-3,
Here’s a fresh new way that’s trouble-free,
It’s got Paul Anka’s guarantee…
Lisa: Guarantee void in Tennessee.
Both: Just don’t look! Just don’t look!
Just don’t look! Just don’t look!
Just don’t look! Just don’t look!
October 3rd, 2008 at 8:15 pm
In response to the previous commenter,
I had every invitation to make my views known. I quote Mr. Siegel above, “If something seems ridiculous, ask someone or post a comment here. There’s probably a good explanation for it.”
I still haven’t gotten my explanation, though I have been called “bitching” and a “troll.” One wonders what else I should be called for simply voicing my mind and concern. So much for a school that once believed in “commerce,” you’ll find the Forum, its established newspaper, quite bankrupt in ideas or respect.
October 3rd, 2008 at 10:12 pm
HAHAHAHAHHAAHA seriously? Troy Aiken gonn smack a bitch!
October 4th, 2008 at 12:03 am
The ASCMC financially supports the Port Side (and the Forum) because it is a legitimate campus publication with a benefit to a large portion of the student population, and they asked for money. It’s the same reason ASCMC gave the anti-abortion club “Live Action” about $200 last year– we don’t discriminate against any political leaning.
What if “Live Action” were sued for libelous remarks at a club event about a professor at CMC? How would ASCMC be any less liable? Either way, we’re a 501c3 corporation with no long term assets. We just aren’t concerned about liability.
October 4th, 2008 at 12:18 am
Thanks for providing an argument, but Live Action has never been sued — how could it be as it makes no public statements of any kind other than to respect life — while the Port Side almost was.
It is the norm at most colleges for them to be funded independently of the student government or college. If a settlement were awarded for a lawsuit, it would be quite expensive indeed and wouldn’t absolve the organization of the debt associated with an attorney, etc.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:32 am
I shouldn’t get into this, but if you’re going to get legal about it, (I guess this is CMC, the school of economics-accounting majors, government majors, and constitutional junkies), we can go there.
You, Charles, are a minority voting shareholder in ASCMC. The shareholders of ASCMC (yourself included) were given the right to vote to elect members of the ASCMC Board of Directors, who make decisions alongside the ASCMC Senate (which any student can join) to make decisions. At this time, the majority of the elected Board of Directors is not worried about the risk we carry by supporting clubs like the Port Side.
Thanks for voicing your concern, though. Next time try to do it in a more pleasant and less obviously partisan manner. If want to change ASCMC policy, you can always vote for a different student candidate or run for office. “Whining” about it on the internet clearly isn’t doing it for you.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:40 am
I am indeed a minority shareholder in ASCMC. You’re right that I got the right to vote, but that doesn’t mean it is necessarily right or noble for you to take other people’s money to pay for other people’s pleasures. If people value the Port Side, they will pay for it.
Given that you can vote on your first meeting to ASCMC on the allotment of funds, it doesn’t seem worth being a part of a rigged game in which one can get enough of one’s buddies to sit in a room and vote away others’ money.
P.S. I appreciate you saying “whining”, but I wasn’t whining and I was very pleasant. I was asking a question and pointing something out to people. The very fact that I’m getting my question answered now shows that it was effective, if embarrassing for Ross.
October 4th, 2008 at 1:11 pm
This isn’t embarrassment, CJ. This is me using my time most effectively on more important aspects of my life. Someone I don’t even view as within my “circle” is not someone I need to argue endlessly with. If anything, you should be embarrassed by making so many enemies that someone actually hacked into your email account. As a former supervisor of mine would say, “You’re a winner!”
PS Thanks Josh for providing official ASCMC rationale on club liability.
October 5th, 2008 at 9:08 am
Beside the legal issue, which I admittedly know nothing about, I would counter the statement that it “is of little benefit to the student body”. The Port Side won that award last year and as a result there was positive press for the college. I actually know a handful of people who stumbled across the press release and became more interested in Calremont McKenna as a result. Yes, it was an award from a liberal group, but it still put Claremont McKenna on more people’s radar, increasing interest in applying to the school, causing more competition for admissions; which I am sure a conservative can approve of. And voila, ipso facto The Port Side benefits the student body…stop being so petty Mr. Jacobson, it is so unbecoming. What would Ayn think of such wanton indignation?
PS I am also really happy that a Halloween Simpsons reference made it onto this board.
October 5th, 2008 at 2:41 pm
Thanks for pointing that out, Mr. Brancolini.
The Port Side award came from the same group funding them! So much for objectivity… I guess any press is good press.
Meanwhile, when the Claremont Independent broke a story about how a CMC professor was all but extorting Holocaust professors and our editor-in-chief won a $10,000 award, the school didn’t even mention it. Double standard much?
Whose being petty? I just don’t see a need for the students to pay for more PR of dubious merit. Don’t we have a PR office for that?
October 5th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
I mean you’re so ridiculously partisan this is almost certainly futile but I will try anyway.
Regardless of the alleged double standard you didn’t really add anything. My point is that The Port Side got the school positive press, which is a fact. You insist that it was of “dubious merit” but regardless, it’s good press for the school which is good for the student body.
You simply disagree with the magazine’s political positions, much in the same way that I disagree with the Live Action group, but as Josh pointed out, they received funding too because political leanings do not factor into the allocation process.
Move on Chuck! There are more important things in this world to worry about!
October 6th, 2008 at 12:42 pm
Whose partisan? The school gets positive press by how high our beer numbers are in U.S. News & World Report. Positive depends on the eye of the beholder.
October 6th, 2008 at 5:54 pm
Actually, the beer numbers come from The Princeton Review. These numbers, by the way, sadly have fallen from 8th most beer on campus last year to 13th this year. This is very tragic. Now is not the time for a conservative alcohol consumption; we must adopt a more progressive policy on how to increase the deficit created.
October 6th, 2008 at 7:50 pm
Ross, are you really suggesting that someone who is the victim of a crime ought to be embarrassed? Apply that a little further, next time, genius.
October 6th, 2008 at 10:57 pm
Positive depends on the eye of the beholder… exactly! So people, obvisouly not you, but people do find merit in The Port Side so youe kvetching is obnoxious.
But good job finding something equally asinine to fuss about…
October 6th, 2008 at 11:18 pm
CJ, I shouldn’t be writing this, but you’re taking this too far, and I honestly need an excuse not to do my biotech homework…
I really AM suggesting that you should be embarrassed for what (unfortunately) happened to you. I learned from a young age that you treat everyone, EVERYONE, with civility and respect. As soon as you lose that, you inevitably open the door to problems.
You (unfortunately) have failed at this, and have made a name for yourself in current CMC society more for your lack of respect and civility than for your political acumen.
I really am sorry that you have to now deal with this attack. Someone definitely took things too far, and I sincerely hope matters can successfully get resolved. But if you honestly cannot put ANY blame on yourself, cannot learn ANY lessons from what happened, then you really are someone I don’t need to be communicating with, and someone who I prefer would not remark on this website.
Best of Luck,
Ross
October 7th, 2008 at 12:29 am
Benefit depends on the eye of the beholder when its your money you are investing, not other people’s, Nico.
Ross, I’ll take my lumpings on my web site. I treat people with civility and respect all the time, but I have a right — in fact, an obligation — to fight for the issues I deem important. If you can’t take the heat, don’t go to the web site. If you mislead or distort something, you’ll be called on it. It goes with the territory of making and saying things publicly.
I’d like you to point to a single instance in which I “lack[ed” that respect. Of course you’ll find that your attack is more out of failure to respond to my arguments and personal animosity than from actual substance. And no, I’ll be commenting whenever I want on this website.
Thank you for your time,
October 7th, 2008 at 1:04 am
This is like the most comments ever on the forum… CJ is soo ridiculous, it is hillarious. he takes this shit so seriously and I dont think he really gets that no one else does.
October 7th, 2008 at 7:21 am
Why is this a controversy worth revisiting? It is unfair to criticize the Port Side for this, since there is no evidence that the paper by itself exposes ASCMC to liability, as opposed to one quote in one story. I strongly believe that the ’statute of limitations’ for this kind of thing should exist only when the involved students are still attending CMC.
Moreover, yes, ASCMC should not fund the Port Side since is of little benefit to CMC as a whole and of course since it is funded, just reflects the views of the administration. Just as PBS and NPR are of little value since no one listens/watches them and besides they are liberally-biased!