Home » Voices » Letters »

LETTER: A response to McNeely’s letter from Monday

By Letter to the Editor on March 24, 2010 2:00 am in Letters / 14 comments

 

On Monday, Colleen McNeely of the Student Government Association decided to overstep her bounds as a student representative and released confidential information from SGA offices in order to sway the outcome of this election.

As the information divulged is not publicly available, the Evan for President campaign has filed a FERPA complaint against SGA, because students should not have to worry about being publicly attacked by their own representatives.

It is unfortunate that those in power at SGA find it necessary to attack students and CM Life in order to win an election they are losing.

We know SGA is flawed. We know SGA represents their own interests, and not the interests of all CMU students.

That’s why they accepted over $14,000 in bonuses from the administration and caved when it came to tailgate last year.

And that’s what we’re trying to change.

Our opponents have a right to support being paid by the administration.

We happen to believe that student government should be an independent student voice.

Just like CM Life is not run by the administration, so should SGA work toward student interests, not their own.

But no one should fear being called out in the press or otherwise because they disagree with SGA.

This campaign should be about issues, not personal attacks. And the fact of the issue is, we can’t keep voting for more of the same.

We need new leadership in SGA. I know that when students are given the facts, they will choose the candidate that best represents them.

Ben Lazarus
Spokesman, Evan for President
Warren freshman

 

Tags

,

Related Posts

 
  • Former VP

    Mr. Lazarus,

    You are incorrect – the release of membership records is not a violation of your candidates’ FERPA rights. Those records are public knowledge, and easily accessible within the SGA offices.

    The student body has a right to know the true record of your candidates. A few months compared to a few years – the students have a right to know what the official attendance records show.

    I applaud the current Membership Officer for helping share the truth with the student body, because only informed students can cast a vote in this election with all the information they need.

    Sincerely,

    Former Student Body Vice President

  • Mike

    It is clear that the Agnello/Richard campaign did not reach too far in diversifying their ‘help’ for their, well, I guess you could call it a campaign. They picked a degenerate like themselves to speak on their behalf. The apple doesn’t fall far from the tree.

    I guess if you didn’t have any experience in SGA, we would all lie about that too. Notice how Evan’s mouthpiece doesn’t even deny the fact that Agnello lied to CM Life to make himself look better to the masses. McNeely did the research, and now the Agnello campaign is trying to do damage control. I don’t know about the rest of you, but some integrity and honesty is something I look for in a SGA President, not some radical who is lying to students to try to boost his heavily tarnished image on this campus.

    As for Ben, it is time you stop playing lawyer and enter reality. FERPA is not an issue here, but nice smokescreen. It’s clear that you would be running right now, should you have had the GPA requirement. Two years on campus and still listed as a freshman, eh?

    Consider the D-team working for the Agnello campaign as it is an accurate display of the moral cavity and lack of intelligence that these candidates possess.

  • JackJ

    Couldn’t agree more with Mike.

    Talk about desperate! I can’t even believe the lies and ridiculous comments that are coming out of Agnello’s campaign. Well, I guess I mean that are coming out of Ben’s campaign – I can’t remember the last time I heard anything come from Evan or Jessica at all.

    I love the bit about ‘focusing on the issues and not personal attacks’ – even though he points out the absurd lie about SGA members taking $14,000 earlier in the post. Hypocrisy, anyone?

    And let the tailgate thing go – wasn’t it Brittany and Jason that fought against the administration and athletics last year to bring back at least some resemblance of tailgate? Pretty sure it was SGA that helped save tailgate toward the end of the semester.

    In all my time here at CMU, I have never seen such a ridiculous campaign… though I guess what do you expect from Campus Conservatives…

  • Ben Lazarus

    I transfered to CMU from U of M Dearborn spring semester of my freshman year. The majority of those credits were for a political internship and they did not transfer.

    Mike, Jack, I respect your opinion. But please stop playing in to the SGA line of attacks. Let’s keep this campaign about issues.

  • JackJ

    Okay Ben, let’s talk about the issues shall we?

    SGA Executive Council does not receive $14,000 in so-called ‘bonuses.’ The President and VP of SGA receive tuition credits, payed through private donations from the CMU President’s Office – not student tuition dollars. The positions don’t see a dime of actual money at all.

    You and Evan have lied throughout this campaign about this information and your involvement in SGA over the past few years. You are purposefully misleading the student body. That seems like a serious issue to me.

    Besides, I haven’t seen any proof or documentation presented by you or anyone else to back up any of your claims. Though – all the publicly available SGA budgets seem to indicate that there is no foundation for your claims. If you do have some proof, somewhere, to back up anything you claim – I’m sure we’d all love to hear it… but until that day it will be the same baseless, ridiculous rhetoric you have spouted since day one.

    If people reading this want to talk about REAL issues and a REAL platform, check out Brittany and Dave’s facebook group: Mouzourakis/Breed for SGA President and Vice President.

  • Nick C

    Hi Ben,

    When trying to decide who to vote for in this upcoming election, I want to know all that I can about both candidates.

    Would you be able to provide information on how you found out about the $14,000 in bonuses? As far as I’m aware, Brittany and Dave have provided information about a $9,000 stipend… I haven’t been able to find any information anywhere that says the current administration accepted $14,000 in bonuses. Is there more info that the students should know about? Could you elaborate on those bonuses?

    Thank you,
    Nick C

  • Jon Boy

    The $14,000 number is not even important here. SGA IS PAYING THEMSELVES!!! Can anyone else with a normal mind understand that. Mouzourakis/Breed for SGA President and Vice President Facebook group admit to it and then say the number is somewhere north of 9,000. But Wait, the President and VP also get 12 credit hours in credit. So if you at that into the mix you are somewhere north of $16,000 on a conservative estimate.

    The REAL number is $16,000.

    If Mr. Breed would like to comment.
    “The funding for this system is payed through CMU’s President’s Office – which does not come from student tuition dollars at all.”

    Well then WHO PAYS IT!

  • Ben Lazarus

    $9,174 Stipends + $4,9938 Discretionary = $14,167 in SGA Bonuses. That does not include the free tuition both SGA President and VP receive.

  • JackJ

    Wow, you’d think I’d be used to seeing all of the absurdity and backwardness of Evan’s campaign supporters by now…

    Let’s see, so the $9,000 in stipends we can agree does exist and is clearly listed in their budget. Doesn’t sound like anyone is denying that fact at all – but does anyone know why that money is divided among all 7 members of the Executive Council? So that even economically disadvantaged students have a chance to take leadership roles. Students shouldn’t have to decline from involvement on campus just because they need a job to buy groceries. So that small pittance (about $1,000 over the course of a year) helps to pay for groceries, tuition, and housing for the students that give up their time to serving this campus. When a lot of them spend 20 hours or more a week working for students – I don’t think I mind them getting at least a little money for how much they do for us. If you disagree, you are clearly ignorant about how much work they really do.

    Evan wants to get rid of that? Have only the richest students rule everything? That doesn’t sound very fair or representative to me. Seems like everyone should have a right to participate in government and take leadership roles – what a progressive thought!

    Funny that you include the ‘discretionary fund’ as a bonus – check the budget again – the breakdown of how that money is spent is clearly shown. Costs for SGA forums, donations given to other groups, I don’t see anything that says that money is being given to themselves. Good try though.

    Ben was right – let’s keep to the real issues and leave this nonsense behind.

  • DBreed

    Jon Boy-

    I would love to take this opportunity to answer your question. Like I said on the Mouzourakis/Breed for SGA President and Vice President facebook group, it is true that not a single student dime is used for funding the tuition credit given to the President and Vice President.

    The funds provided through the CMU President’s Office come from private sources and donors. As for a list of the specific donors, you would be best off contacting the Office of Student Life or the CMU’s President’s Office. If you or anyone else cares to contact them, they will assure you that student tuition dollars are not touched at all.

    With regards to the stipends, even Brittany and I recognize the need for all areas of campus to make sacrifices in the face of budget uncertainty. We have agreed that stipends for the Executive Council will be scaled back if we are to be elected – but we will not eliminate them entirely. JackJ was right, every student deserves the opportunity to take on leadership roles and give back to the campus that has provided us all with so much. We cannot support the discrimination that would result from eliminating them entirely against the students who could not afford to take on these roles.

    As a side note, it is important to know that the SGA budget is approved by both the House of Representatives and the Senate, stipends included (which passed both houses unanimously this year). Not only this, but CMU’s administration oversees any payment of student stipends. It would be utterly impossible for the SGA Executive Council to ever pay themselves anything due to this considerable oversight.

    Hope this clarification helps!

    ~Dave Breed
    Vice Presidential Candidate

  • Andrew

    Looks like a pretty good lesson on government (at any level) to me.

  • T

    Having sat on discussions with other student leaders during the last fall semester, I also know that Jason and Brittany did a lot of work to get the student voices heard regarding tailgating last fall. It was negotiations led by Jason that helped bring something as simple as speakers back to tailgating by the end and if the plans that were started then continue forward next year, tailgating should be headed back toward a fun experience. But know that this year’s ticket never gave up on tailgating but many students did once it was over.

    Also, Ben, could you please tell whoever is hanging up signs for Evan to stop hanging them on trees on Main Street? It is definitely not a good advertising move.

  • Richard In DC

    Mr. Breed,

    It turns out that your assertion wholly untruthful. Upon contacting the Dean of Students office, it has been made very clear that there is no “donation fund” directed to SGA board members. Thank you for the vague direction to support your dubious claim. You’ve hedged your smear on the fact that CMU students are lazy and will not follow up on your claims. We all know if CM-Life reporters won’t extensively investigate anything. Not to mention their pet candidate.

    As I comb through the articles posted on CM-Life it is easy to recognize the operation is out in full force against Mr. Agnello. The same 4-5 parties are posting on every article, not to mention the less than fair reporting. Only yesterday was the Agnello camp able to get a few people to post comments on his behalf. But look out! the opposition had their trusty 4-5 hacks fire back with the standard SGA talking points and unfounded attacks.

    It seems that hope and change in Mt. Pleasant has failed to eliminate machine politics from such a simple operation as Student Government.

  • Winston Smith

    The same 4-5 parties are posting on every article? really Richard?
    well that is about 4 more than are posting in support of Evan, because all I’ve seen for him is you over and over.

    Did you ever consider the possibility that he just sounds ridiculous? Or is everything a conspiracy to you?

    First Evan says that CM-Life should moderate the debate because they aren’t bias, now you are saying that CM-Life is mean to Evan when they report things he says and that they are bias now too.

    It must be so nice to live in a world of certainty and absolutes, where everyone who says things you don’t like is instantly an enemy and logic never shows up to inconvenience you.

    “Sanity is not statistical.”-George Orwell