I am sitting in Stark lounge right now watching yet another student be wheeled by gurney from Auen to the hospital room and it hit me: there is something seriously wrong with our school's drinking culture. After all, weren't parties supposed to be banned this weekend? (Looks like prohibition has worked wonders again...)
I don't know if I favor a ban, but I can certainly understand why some people are considering it. I would only be comfortable with a ban if the school were to give us back all the money we put into the college partying fund. Now that there are no parties, surely non-drinkers and drinkers could unite on this point? We paid for a service and now that service isn't being rendered. Put simply, where do we go to get our money back?
This party inform is part of the problem. How pathetic is it that we need to have our elected officials tell us how to have fun? He literally needs to list ways for you to amuse yourself. Of course you just know the reason this email was sent out was that people complained about the lack of parties.
To all those who party,
The "let's not talk about it" from the party inform from this Saturday seemed to be a bad idea on my part. Some people mistook that there was a hidden agenda for the night. There are no school sponsored parties tonight. However, there are tons of fun things to do on a Saturday night.
The reasons for tonight not having a party is a mix of things. But in short, we're changing some rules right now, and we're not done changing them. Believe me when I say this is temporary. I know the transition phase has been long, but it'll soon be over. I promise you huge parties and great day parties soon.
For those of you upset about partyless weekend nights, I'll start off by saying I understand. One of the many great things about our school is that we have school sponsored parties. You can't forget how to have fun without these parties though. Before CMC, I doubt your highschool had parties every weekend. After CMC, I doubt your company will have parties every weekend (if they do, please tell me how I can get a job there). You still have fun on Saturdays though. So if you're reading this e-mail tonight (Saturday), go have fun. For those of you reading this after tonight, hope you had a great night!
I apologize for this last minute e-mail, I should of sent this out earlier.
YOHEI
PS: Here's a list of some fun things to do:
Bowling (It doesn't have to be a wednesday to bowl)
Bars (if you're 21)
Movie
Hookah Bars (there's a lot around campus)
Mount Baldy (if you haven't been there, there's some fun places up there)
Morongo (it's a casino)
Go on adventures
Do things you don't normally do with a group of friends (like what? it's up to you)
Hang out with me
21 comments:
The postscript things sound fun. I assume they have been paid for by ASCMC and if we flash our ID cards, everything is free!
Charles,
I read your blog quite often, and I tend to agree with you on issues like the problem of hypersensitivity. But your articles on CMC, and particularly the way ASCMC works, have been shamelessly under-researched and misguided.
First of all, ASCMC is a private company, with its own private accounting books and tax code provisions. None of the money you "pay the school" goes to ASCMC, and vice versa. This year, you (or your parents) paid ASCMC $200 to provide you with a social life. You or your parents probably paid in the ballpark of $45,000 this year to CMC for your college education and room and board.
Given the size of ASCMC's party budget within the overall budget, you paid in the ballpark of $50-60 for parties (including dry events, such as last weekends pie eating contest and the hookah party). The remainder of your student fee goes to things like the publication of an issue of the CI. So if you want a $50-60 rebate, that's fine, but stop using other people's funds and don't join any ASCMC clubs or organizations. Also, it doesn't matter if parties aren't happening because ASCMC tries to spend its entire budget every year.
Also, it was interesting that you selected the setting you did for your post. Given that (a) Stark is not representative of normal CMC dorm culture and (b) the alcohol poisoning occurred within a dorm on a night when no official outdoor party took place. I wonder if this is why we have the lenient policies we do. I think it is.
Lastly, you are again factually incorrect when you claimed that parties were supposed to be cancelled this weekend. Just because Yohei didn't register a party in time does not mean that parties were cancelled. There were official parties on both Thursday and Friday.
Either learn how party funding works, or stop writing about it. I like this blog too much to see you look like the dumb freshman.
Thanks Patrick for clearing things up for me, but I still have questions.
On the point about ASCMC being a private company, that means it can be audited right? If I'm going to be forced to take part in it, I think we ought to have outside auditors come in periodically and check that all the money is spent properly.
Generally when I'm forced to pay for something I don't partake in, it's called robbery. I read my tuition bill over very carefully. I didn't see anywhere that it said that money was optional.
Yes, I would like my $200 dollars back. Every little bit helps and I'm sure I can find a great way to spend that money. Maybe I can buy a digital camera for this blog, for instance. That's a digital camera per year. Not bad if you ask me.
The only club I am a part of that receives school funds is Live Action -- and those funds are minimal at best. The Claremont Independent receives no money from the school. If I had my way, very, very few school organizations would receive any money at all. If you can't raise your money yourself, maybe what you are pushing isn't very good after all.
On your last two points, I don't believe that Stark is representative.
And you are, of course, right about the alcohol poisoning taking place on a night with no school-sanctioned outdoor parties. You're probably right about why we have the lenient policies we do. You don't want everyone sitting in their rooms getting drunk and dying, after all. I'm sorry if I was unclear in the post.
Thanks for the advice, though. I'll try to avoid being a "dumb freshman."
"Generally when I'm forced to pay for something I don't partake in, it's called robbery."
No Charles, it's not robbery when you knowingly consent to paying this fee.
Patrick,
ASCMC doesn't spend its entire budget. They retained roughly $60,000. 26%!
So I guess we should get some money back.
kury party!!,
I think what CJ meant was the following:
That taxes are always coercive.
I agree robbery was a little extreme. But the expenditure is not with consent. We don't have a say in how our money is spent. So when the ASCMC decides not hold a party, our money just lies waste. There's no legitimate reason why all of us should have to pool our money and contribute $6,000 to the Queer Resource Center or $800 to the Vagina Monologues!
1) I definitely just wanted to clarify the legal structure of ASCMC. They certainly are not 100% independent of the school (like when the school shuts down parties).
2) Though I disagree with you that all clubs should be forced to raise their funds on their own (due to the amount of time and energy that takes and how much it would decrease student involvement in clubs), I recognize that it is not a point beyond debate. Should we be forced to give ASCMC $200? Ultimately, I can only defend it by saying that the quality of life on this campus would decrease sharply without a student body government with such a large budget. That said, I have plenty of problems with the way they allocate that money. I don't think it's robbery, but perhaps it's more like Hillary's healthcare proposal.
3) I recognize I was wrong about the CI.
4) As to the 26% retained earnings, this is a manipulated statistic. True, ASCMC had $60,000 in retained earnings at the beginning of this year. True, that figure is 26% of their budget. But they do not retain 26% of their budget annually.
CMC collects its funds in a Pendleton Account and then checks it at the beginning of the year to see how much money it can budget. It then outlines a budget to spend this money.
Now, at the end of the year, every club comes before ASCMC to request a certain level of funding for the next year. Ask for $6k, get 3 or 2, or something like that. Then, a club must actually spend that money, document it, and then ask ASCMC for reimbursement. It is here that ASCMC fails to spend its budget. Not all clubs use what they are allotted, and more often they aren't run well enough to document their spending properly.
Still, this doesn't get us to $60,000, which is really the result of shabby accounting over a series of years.
The big problem is that ASCMC needs professional accountants instead of an undergrad with a $1,000 stipend. But as you might guess, the students will have to pay for it. Beware of the law of unintended consequences here. At the end of the day, if CMC can't offer its students a wide array of enjoyable, well-funded clubs and a decent social life, it will not be able to compete with larger, richer, and better-established institutions.
Patrick,
I'll have a longer response tomorrow, but I doubt that students will stop coming to Claremont McKenna because we don't fund clubs. More likely, those clubs will find other sources of revenue.
"This keg brought to you by Halliburton!"
No, it's not that you don't have a say in how the money is spent. In this instance, student government works like any other government. You vote for someone you trust to spend responsibly, or you run for something yourself. It's obscenely easy to become a senator here, and senators do get to see (and approve) the budget. And, if there are enough people like you who care, you can change things. And if not... well, that's how democracy works. If you care so much, stop whining about being robbed and do something.
Kitty,
All governments have a limit on their power. If ASCMC wanted to have a police force or raise an army, you would surely object. You would also object if they decided to take all the money that we all are forced to pay into the common fund and wrote checks to certain group members. That's exactly what currently goes on with funding.
Some governments ought not have the powers they are given -- or that they take for themselves.
I barely trust my elected officials with my money. Why should I trust a random, winner of a liberal arts popularity contest?
Nothing wrong with corporate sponsorship, Peter.
Patrick,
Re: Point 4
Thats exactly the problem! I doubt the $60,000 surplus is a random instance. The allocation problem isn't going away!
I'm glad you shared these details because we deserve the transparency. The least we deserve is access to Income statements and Budgets.
I don't think the stipend is a problem here. I would do it! Produce monthly cash flows and income statements for $1200*. It looks great on a resume that you were CFO for a 230,000 fund.
The real problem is transparency. Students would raise concerns if the Queer Club gets 3 times as much as College Democrats and Republicans combined roughly. Once we know how fucked up things are we might step in.
Essentially we are shareholders and customers at the same time, and the former have a right to all ASCMC activity and documents.
confusedminority,
The most up to date budget is on the ASCMC website. If people want to look at it, they are more than welcome to do so.
And FYI to all:
The $60,000 is not all from the pendelton account. 1/3 of it is unspent money budgeted allocated for the 2006-2007 year. The rest is from the pendelton account.
I know last year, there was a debate in the Senate about is it fair that some political groups get more than others, and club X gets more than club Y, etc, etc. The simple fact of the matter is that different clubs ask for different amounts, and they have different numbers of members (or different numbers of 5C members), and all of this gets taken into account in the budget committee. There's a lot of stuff that you could cry foul over if you didn't know the back story (which of course you can't see on the budget).
And I would agree with the assertion that club membership would go down if clubs were required to raise their own funds. My high school made that decision, and membership in all clubs dropped significantly because students signed on for one thing (community service, political discussions, etc), and instead got to spend the majority of their time discussing who was selling what at the next bake sale. Two years later, they changed it back.
Even if you didn't factor non-academic factors into your decision personally, many people choose their schools because of what the school has to offer both inside and out of the classroom. Part of the beauty of college is that you have a chance to explore a grand variety of interests before settling into the real world. Where else but in college (or maybe high school) can you be in a play, write for a paper, be a part of student government, debate and/or participate in political groups, dance, and do community service all at the same time? On second thought, even college students would have to settle between picking two or three, but I think you get my point... certainly someone who's working more than full time with a couple kids could only dream of pursuing such diverse interests. (Kinda makes marrying well and being housewife attractive- kidding). Basically, this is your chance. Take advantage of it. Even if you don't party, I'm sure there's something you might enjoy every now and then. Friday Night Snack, maybe?
And someone please correct me if I'm wrong, but don't dorm funds also come from the student fees? As a former Stark resident, I know for a fact that Stark offers dinners and study breaks and has an extensive DVD collection and a nicer lounge than many (all?) of the other dorms. If my assertion that the dorm funds come from student fees is true, then you probably do use them in some degree or another.
No matter what you say here, there's still going to be a student fee. So instead of looking at it like you're being robbed, try looking at it like "I paid $200, and I'm going to get my money's worth." Life's more fun that way.
Thanks for being so polite, Anonymous. If you don’t mind, I’ll try to explain what problems I have with your point by addressing it paragraph by paragraph. If clubs get their money based upon how many members they have, then there is an incentive for clubs to inflate their number of members. We’ve all been a part of clubs that
There’s also an incentive for clubs to splinter because of disagreements rather than working out a compromise within the club. If I join club X and club X’s members bother me, but have money, why, I can just quit club X and start club Y and then get funding from the school.
The beauty of a budget is that you see only the numbers and numbers don’t by themselves indicate who is more deserving or who is less deserving. This isn’t a question that budgets can answer and this isn’t a question we ought to be asking.
My high school also had that position. To cover fees for various clubs, we sold pizzas. I sold $20,000 worth to fund a whole host of different clubs. It taught me a thing or two about business and I made sure that the money was properly spent. (We bought pizzas for 7$ each, cut them into eighths and then resold the pizza for 5 dollars for two silences.) The school, by making us more responsible with our clubs’ money, taught us to be diligent – and innovative -- fundraisers.
The question of non-academic factors is where we part ways. You see I believe that schools should only concern themselves with the education of their students. To try and suggest that college students won’t explore a grand variety of interests on their own initiative is kind of silly and I don’t think it is entirely accurate. College students will figure out a way to have those things work out, especially if it’s something they want to do. Naturally, they want the school to pay for it, but that doesn’t make it right or efficient.
Think about it this way. Colleges have an incentive to continue rising tuition (Hence the reason so many schools have fees that are included outside of tuition) If colleges raise tuition, then more and more students become eligible for federal college aid and the colleges are off the hook to help provide the money.
On your point about Stark and student fees, I’m pretty sure each dorm is allocated a certain amount of money. Most other dorms spend their money on alcohol. Stark, obviously, does not. I think that money is actually covered in room and board tuition, but I could be wrong.
You may well be right that there’s always going to be a student fee, but that doesn’t make it right.
I respectfully disagree on your point about “getting my money’s worth.” It’s not very efficient, nor is it very fair. Imagine a Muslim or a Mormon student. How’s he or she supposed to get their money’s worth? They can’t drink and their choices are severely limited. I might be a bit old school on this, but I think I’m a better spender of my money than someone else is.
Think about it this way. Imagine we all went to a party and paid 5 dollars to drink beer for the whole night. Some of us – probably the females and light-weights – wouldn’t drink that much. While others of us – probably the bigger gentlemen – could outdrink all of us. It would be a good investment on the bigger gentlemen’s part to come to the party, but the light-weights could just as easily stay in their rooms and drink cheaper liquor.
Of course, we have a bit of a problem at Claremont McKenna with the student fees. Our party budget is much, much larger than the other schools – and so, naturally, we’re subsidizing the costs of other people’s good times. Claremont High School students know this and come to our parties. Suddenly, I wonder whether that 200 bucks is just paying for me or whether I’m picking up the tab for other people I don’t even know.
I'll agree with you that people are better spenders of their own money. I can understand and respect having these principles, but sometimes it's most practical to base your decisions on what will happen rather that what you think should happen but know won't. My point is just that if it won't change, and you are paying the money, you should find some way to make sure that money doesn't go to waste.
As someone who's spent a lot of time working with ASCMC, I would argue that we budget for a lot of dry activities. I mentioned a number of them in my post (see above... and I hope these two posts prove that I can play nice). Obviously, not all of them will interest everyone. But SLC offers something dry every weekend (there's been movie nights on campus, subsidized tickets to movies and sporting events, viewings of different tv shows- often with food, Friday night snack, etc). There are clubs. (On your note about Muslims or Mormons not being able to enjoy the fruits of student fees, I know the Muslim organization on campus is very active and is funded in part by ASCMC). Many extra-curricular activities are subsidized: the papers (save for the CI), debate, mock trial, model UN... possibly more. (Budget was a long time ago, and that meeting was a particularly long one, so I don't remember all the particulars). If you enjoy plays, chances are the tickets (if there are any) are cheaper because ASCMC helped with the production... and there is more than just the Vagina Monologues, I promise! If you find a conference or a speech that you (and maybe some friends) want to go to, you can apply for funding for transportation and/or entry fees from the Student Trips Fund. If you have a group of more than 6 CMC students doing something (even if it's just going out to dinner), you can talk to Jim Nauls and he'll likely give you some money, as long as you don't abuse the system, though that money may be from a separate source of funding.
Forgive me if I sound a bit of a cheerleader, but I love my school and feel that for the most part our student government does a good job with trying to meet peoples' needs. My primary goal is only to make people feel like they can make ASCMC work for them even if they aren't partiers. There's been a lot of pressure for dry activites, and I feel like they're responding. But if dry activities are important to you, I urge you to go to them or to SLC meetings. If people don't show up, it's more likely that dry funds will just be cut rather than that fees will be lowered.
Polite anonymous person did a nice job elaborating on some (but not all) of the points I was trying to make.
Really, I just chose this particular post (being slightly less heated than, say, your sexual assault post) to point out some of my issues with the direction of your blog. I meant, and still mean what I said as constructive, because the fact that I check this blog regularly would make me a fan.
In a response, you say "you see I believe that schools should only concern themselves with the education of their students." To do this I have two responses:
a) nobody cares. it's one thing to raise gripes about the money ASCMC takes out of your wallet, and the way in which they allocate this money (In fact, I would say that if more people did this, we would have more responsible and accountable ASCMC officers). It is quite another thing to offer your overarching opinion on the purpose of higher education.
b) like it or not, CMC did not get to where it is solely by giving out a lot of money to ivy league exports (though that's certainly how we originally built our great faculty).
CMC has risen sharply in the ranks because it can offer things that comparable liberal arts colleges cannot. One of these things is the 5-C community. Another is our application of a practical framework (econ, gov, and int'l relations, to which our administration is trying to add the sciences). Another is the athenaeum and our research institutes.
But a big part of CMCs attraction is the social life it can provide. The weather is part of it. But a lot of it is the result of policies. One is guaranteed housing for all students for all four years. Because of this, over 95% of students live on campus for all four years. That's a big bonus for many, and it keeps out of class debate and college camaraderie high.
Now the question becomes, do these 1,100 students come to live in an academic prison or a madhouse? Based on reputation, some schools like U of Chicago do quite alright as the former (self-promoted as "the place fun goes to die"), whereas New Orleans-based Tulane thrives as more of the latter. As CMC is generally study-hard, play-hard, it's somewhere in between.
As I'm sure you are aware, going to college is more than just taking 4-5 classes a semester. It actually takes up four years of your life. As one is only in class for 10-15 hours a week, colleges that offer a wide variety of activities with which one can fill the other 153-158 hours tend to do better than others. Especially if the students can spend their time on the clubs and not pizza or bake sales.
I think if you'll look around, you'll find clubs that people actually throw energy into and get utility out of. Also, if you ever run for a position that would get you on the ASCMC budgeting committee, you would see that they allocate money based on the number of members and more importantly, the number of students benefitting from the activities.
Your little bit about the beer consumption ratio doesn't even pass through Econ 50 here. You failed to take into account positive externalities.
Thus, parties get the largest percentage share of the budget because so many people attend them. Even those that do not drink benefit from the atmosphere of the party (if they didn't, why did they go?) This atmosphere is in part provided by the people who are drinking. But this isn't even the main point, because even with the largest party budget we've ever had, a very small fraction of that goes to those gross kegs of Icehouse they serve. Much more money goes to security, decorations, lights, and music. Which are things even Starkies can enjoy.
Because of this shift in priorities, these parties are drawing significantly more people than in past years and have justified the increase in budget. It's hard to take your argument seriously when 300-500 people were showing up last semester for just an average TNC. The White Party we all know and love was the biggest party I've seen here, and was largely financed by profits made on the also successful Monte Carlo. Not to mention the huge SLC budget that was brought up earlier.
And yes, your dorm events are financed by ASCMC, and if other dorms choose to spend this money on parties, it's only because their presidents were elected by their dorms after saying they'd do exactly that
And if you're really going to put out there the occasional alcohol poisoning as a reason for school intervention in the drinking culture here, I can only say that this is a categorical denial of the principle of individual responsibility on which your (and my) beloved individual freedom is largely based.
As for traditional clubs, my main experience has been on the mock trial team. Going into junior year, we had a team of 9 members, and our budget was accordingly small. Now we have three teams, and our ASCMC allotment has risen to match. Of course, this allocation can't come close to paying for things like airfare, hotels, and food for the national tournament we just qualified, but as with last year, we can raise $10,000 with just a few emails. By the standard you mentioned in your first response to me, I guess we're a very good club.
In the end, if academics were your sole concern, there are many honors programs at state universities that would have probably given you close to a free ride. Clearly something made you want to come to a school with a $45,000/yr price tag.
Back to my concerns as a reader, I would appreciate if you would not (quite literally) sit in your tower and rail against all the things at CMC that you do not participate in and/or do not enjoy.
I agree 100% with anonymous who said "try looking at it like 'I paid $200, and I'm going to get my money's worth.' Life's more fun that way."
It's not really the content of your blog I have issues with, but rather your voice as a writer. There will be plenty of time to be a curmudgeon. For Christ sakes dude, you're 19 years old. Come down and hang out with us commoners. You might enjoy yourself. Even if you don't, you'll at least have some first hand knowledge of the things you write so passionately about.
Thanks for reading the blog, Patrick. You and I aren’t going to agree on ASCMC.
a) You see, you’re more a libertine and I’m more of a libertarian and never the two shall meet on this issue.
As for the purpose of college being about education and entry into the job market, I care. And I’m not alone. The reason colleges are so heavily subsidized with taxpayer money is that they care. (Or more directly, their legislators care, and stick the taxpayers with the bill.)
My opinion is my own. You’re going to have to come up with a better argument than nobody cares, because, well, some people do care what I think of education. I certainly do and that’s enough for me to continue writing about it.
b) No one is arguing that CMC got where it was due to its hand out of money to “ivy league exports.” We got where we are because we had certain shared commitments to education. The 5 C community is a part of that shared commitment. The Ath and the research institutes are another part. All of those groups seek to increase the amount of education or information in the world.
A big part of your attraction to Claremont McKenna is the social life. I came for the gov/econ focus and the fact that it’s more conservative (although ever so slightly) than other colleges. I came for the education and for the fact that a liberal arts college is more in tune with my learning style than a large lecture hall.
No, a big reason over 95% of students live on campus for all four years is that renting in the surrounding area is very, very expensive. If the cost of college rises relative to the cost of renting, more people will rent.
I just don’t know how you can speak for all 1,100 students. Some come more for the social scene. Some come only for the academics. And there’s a mix in between.
On the question of clubs, I think this line you might want to rethink.
“I think if you'll look around, you'll find clubs that people actually throw energy into and get utility out of. Also, if you ever run for a position that would get you on the ASCMC budgeting committee, you would see that they allocate money based on the number of members and more importantly, the number of students benefitting from the activities. “
So that’s why there’s more money given to the QRC than the Claremont Republicans, the Claremont Democrats, and the Claremont Libertarians combined? I’m just not comfortable with students – or anyone really – making the decision about where my money can be better spent.
Parties do get the largest share of the budget because people go to them, but again, that doesn’t make it right. Maybe if C.M.C. parties operated on a ticket scheme where people who wanted to drink and wanted to go to the parties would pay for them themselves, then things would be fairer. The people who go to all the parties could pay for them. The people who go to no parties could keep their money. I think it’s morally questionable when you force people to pay for things they don’t participate in. A huge incentive to go to these parties is the free stuff being thrown around. 1400 bucks for a mechanical bull? More people will go if freebies are handed out. Maybe the people who rode on the mechanical bull could pay for it.
Please. Patrick, you can’t argue for a welfare state on campus paid for by tax and then turn around and argue for individual responsibility. My position – that if you use something, you pay for it – pays the utmost respect for individual responsibility. You can’t argue for the country clubificiation of the campus if you’re not willing to pay for it. Some of us are just as happy going to our classes, playing board games and watching movies on our laptops.
I’m not saying people shouldn’t be allowed to drink themselves into a coma. I am saying that those decisions reflect poorly on the school and we get the reputation of an alcoholic campus. Maybe if we determined how much our reputation was worth and then charged those people an obscene amount of money for each hospital visit we could cut down on the drunkenness.
Well done on raising the money. If only more clubs followed your lead…
Actually, most of the state schools I was admitted into were more expensive than Claremont McKenna. I’ve already answered this question though. I came to Claremont McKenna for the professors and the education, not for the drinking. Frankly, I can make better booze purchases with $200 bucks, anyways. I don’t need any flash lights or awful music.
I’ll have no complaints with CMC’s drinking culture when I don’t pay for it. If I must pay for it, I want an independent auditor to come in and do some serious oversight of the school’s budget.
Thanks for reading the blog, Patrick, but I do enjoy myself. One of my number one pleasures is writing for this blog and hanging out with my girlfriend. I choose to do those things and I love every minute of them. Choice, after all, is always preferable to force.
Fair enough Charles. Although I would consider myself more of a libertarian than a libertine. Labels never were all that appealing to me. Still the libertarianism of my philosophy is tempered by a certain pragmatism. I think at this point I've made my points and you have made yours. If only there were a public forum for the sort of debates that are only hashed out through the convenience of your comment boxes. I won't be around for this, but i would encourage you to start some sort of debate society on issues concerning the students of this college. It's long overdue.
Thanks for the kind words. We all try to be pragmatic, but I find what's often more important is being principled. Though I suppose we all must make our compromises, lest we tilt against the wind mills.
You are absolutely right about the need for a forum of some sort to debate these issues, but I don't think I shall be the one to start it!
I much prefer the blogosphere where the slings and arrows of the outraged and the offended can never pierce my digital hide.
Post a Comment