Editor’s note: As of 9 p.m. Sunday night, the ASUO Constitution Court ruled that the ASUO General Election must be postponed until a decision is reached on Bret Jacobson’s appeal. Whenever the election occurs, we urge you to consider the following.

Support OSPIRG, but demand further accountability
If you haven’t heard about the Oregon Student Public Interest Research Group and its ballot measure by now, you’re probably dead. Posters are everywhere, and the organization’s support and opposition is out in force. The short explanation is, OSPIRG wants $144,426 of student money to continue its environmental and consumer advocacy work. “Honesty” is a campus group opposed to giving money to OSPIRG. The Emerald editorial board spoke with both sides last week.
The OSPIRG representatives repeatedly mentioned that having students vote on OSPIRG was important because it was a referendum on issues. Students rarely get to cast a vote saying, “Yes, I believe in these things,” OSPIRG spokeswoman Melissa Unger told us, and voting for OSPIRG is just that opportunity.
On the other hand, representatives of Honesty told us repeatedly that it wasn’t at all about issues. Honesty spokesman Bill Beutler told us that he, too, cared about the environment, although later comments led us to believe he didn’t share the liberal values OSPIRG stands for. Anyone can say he or she cares about the environment, even President Bush. But OSPIRG has liberal solutions to liberal issues. Honesty doesn’t seem to agree with that.
Accountability was Honesty’s big concern, and it’s a concern we share. But we also generally agree with the work OSPIRG does, and the group has made strides toward greater accountability in recent years. As long as this continues, we support OSPIRG’s request for student incidental fees.
Perhaps the biggest point we would like to make is that OSPIRG needs to present its financial statements to students every year. In our meeting with OSPIRG, we were handed a budget to illustrate where the money goes. But anyone can write up a budget for anything; being shown one is insulting. A budget is not proof of expenditures. An end-of-year financial statement would be.
OSPIRG’s board of directors needs to address the accountability issue at its meetings and arrange to have financial statements sent here so students can look at them. Apparently, students can go to the Oregon State PIRG office in Portland and request the student PIRG’s records to track the money. But if OSPI RG is using our funds honestly, they should send them here. Every student who votes for OSPIRG should call and make that request. It’s $144,426 of your money, after all.
Honesty said that OSPIRG is a fundamentally dishonest group because it doesn’t have any real benefit for students. We couldn’t disagree more.
OSPIRG offers real benefits to students, in the form of attention to and work on local and national issues, as well as professional training in organizing and grassroots lobbying. There are no other student groups that do this sort of work on this scale. And the group’s benefits are available to any student who gets involved. That’s true of every student group. One must be active to reap the benefits.
Honesty’s claim could be disarmed, however, if OSPIRG’s paid staff would appear on campus more often. More could be done to show students the benefits they receive. We challenge OSPIRG to prove their effort to the non-believers. What does $144,426 buy us?
The issue of how OSPIRG uses its money has some merit; students who are deeply concerned about it might want to consider voting against the group, in order to send a message.
However, we think OSPIRG is fundamentally honest, and if it is, it should prove it. In the last few years, OSPIRG has become more open about how its money is used, and it has let students look at its records. The group needs to do more.
In order to stop the continual threats from opposition groups and to keep doing good work, OSPIRG needs to make its financial statements easily accessible on every campus. Students should vote for OSPIRG and demand that it become more transparent. That way, we can all see its honesty and everyone can benefit.

MCC needs a better plan for spending s tudent money
The Multicultural Center is asking for $18,555.87 to establish a fund to help small student groups pay for events on campus. These events, the MCC says, would present “culturally diverse programming.”
Ordinarily, we would be in favor of giving small groups money to further enrich the cultural fabric of University events. Students benefit from exposure to many cultures, and such events provide recreation on campus. In this case, however, we do not support the MCC’s request.
There are two reasons we oppose this ballot measure. First is representation. Any student group should have the opportunity to present its programs. We’re not convinced that all groups will be encouraged to visit the MCC when seeking money for events. The Student Senate, on the other hand, has members directly elected by students, and student groups can go in front of that governing body and ask for money. It seems a safer bet that equal consideration will occur at the Student Senate.
Our other concern is organization. MCC spokesman Mario Sifuentez told us that the MCC will be rewriting its bylaws and establishing a board to dole out the money. But that hasn’t happened yet. The MCC is asking for $18,555.87, but it doesn’t have a structure in place for distributing the money, and we had to ask about accountability. Sifuentez said that although nothing was set up yet, he thought our suggestion of requiring purchase orders and providing financial statements was a good one.
We agree, and when the MCC has a written plan for executing this cultural programming fund, we may support it. In the meantime, we ask you to vote no.