Neil said something about precedents justifying the recent actions USG & GPSC has taken against the Fine Arts Fee, so let’s look at some USG and GPSC precedents by asking some questions.

Has USG & GPSC done a good job funding RSOs and student activities? Has USG & GPSC done a good job funding fine arts events in the past? Is USG & GPSC better suited to decide who gets to choose our fine arts events? The answer to all three is no. USG has done and continues to do a poor job dividing up the student activity fee, so why give them control over the Fine Arts Fee? The Fine Arts Fee was created because USG and GPSC have done a rotten job at funding fine arts events and they seem to still have that problem now, i.e.:The debate over the Urban Congress’s guest speakers and poets. USG & GPSC are not suited to decide on fine arts events; for example, John Waters would probably not have been selected as a speaker by a conservative USG & GPSC or their appointed committee reps, yet more students attended that event than voted in any recent election. Keeping USG & GPSC politicians out of the Fine Arts Fee and letting students who truly care about the fine arts set up events may be a new idea for USG & GPSC. So far, judging on past precedent, it appears the current system is more effective at satisfying students than USG & GPSC, and the Fine Arts Fee can do it with only $5.50 instead of $18.75. I would like to say to USG & GPSC as a student, clean up your own house first, then worry about others, and if the Fine Arts Fee is not broken, then don’t fix it, because you might just destroy it. I would like to know if you, the students, think this is about putting on quality fine arts programming or consolidating power for USG & GPSC? Who do you want to win?