If we were to sum up the behavior of this year’s student leaders in a single word, well — we think you know what word we would use. But if we were to use a word that is not four letters long, it would be “unprofessional” because for all their seemingly official trappings, the entire student government is plagued with an organization-wide case of terminal incompetence.
Not that this should be much of a surprise. The history of student government on this campus is peppered with examples of supreme incompetence, the heights of which this year’s group has not come close to reaching. But in terms of consistency of incompetence, of a shocking lack of professionalism time and time again, it is doubtful that any other year can compare.
Examples of unprofessional behavior among our student leaders are too numerous to mention, but they include arriving late to meetings, being absent during voting and using disrespectful language when discussing groups’ budgets.
Case in point: The Jan. 10 meeting of the Programs Finance Committee started with an apology by PFC Chair Persis Pohowalla for her “unprofessional behavior last week.” The PFC members then agreed to “respect what others have to say,” as if they were a group of kindergartners and not student leaders in control of millions of dollars.
The most egregious example of the PFC’s unprofessionalism this year is its inability to treat groups consistently. The standards with which the PFC measures the need for funds seem to arbitrarily shift with each group. Many groups can attest to the PFC members’ disorganization and confusion over simple matters and the bizarre rationales that are used to justify certain decisions.
How can Pohowalla justify funding the Lane Transit District buss pass fee, which is only used by a fraction of the students, by saying, “Like everything we fund, not every student is going to benefit, but they’ll have the opportunity to benefit,” when the logic used in the Executive recommendation to reduce funding for the Emerald was that less than 100 percent of the students currently read the paper every week?
How can PFC member Jael Anker-Lagos condone the OSPIRG budget, which is sent off-campus for projects not focused on the campus community by saying, “I want to think of OSPIRG’s money being sent off campus as saving University of Oregon students money,” when the Emerald was criticized for distributing some papers in off-campus areas students utilize frequently?
If anything good has come from the PFC’s incompetence this year, it is the cold, hard proof that our current student leaders do not possess the skills or professionalism required to distribute millions of dollars in student incidental fees. Hopefully, they will be held responsible for their behavior when elections roll around rather than ride back into office on a tide of voter apathy.

[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]