EDITORIAL: Haddad expresses reason in USSA controversy

‘ ‘ ‘ Student Government Board members Nila Devanath and Ryan Haddad clashed at Tuesday’s SGB… ‘ ‘ ‘ Student Government Board members Nila Devanath and Ryan Haddad clashed at Tuesday’s SGB meeting over Devanath’s proposal to coordinate a phone-banking drive in collaboration with the United States Student Association, an organization that lobbies on behalf of higher education institutions. ‘ ‘ ‘ Devanath’s goal for the phone-banking drive is to take preventative action against California businessman Ward Connerly’s efforts to eliminate affirmative action in states throughout the country. Connerly succeeded in getting rid of race- and gender-based affirmative action policies in 1996 with California’s Proposition 209. ‘ ‘ ‘ Connerly’s next target state is Colorado, where the state has planned a referendum for voters to cast their ballots in favor or against affirmative action policies. Devanath, the Atlantic Region chair in USSA and the liaison to SGB’s diversity committee, as well as Pitt students who volunteer for the phone-banking drive, will urge Colorado voters to refuse a referendum that would hinder affirmative action in that state. According to Devanath, Pennsylvania is another target state for Connerly. Taking preventative action against the referendum in Colorado, she said, would help limit his success here. ‘ ‘ ‘ But Haddad rightly expressed concern that such a drive would be unethical. Haddad said in a follow-up interview, ‘USSA is supposed to represent Pitt students, and this seemed like members of SGB serving the interests of USSA.’ Haddad went on to say that he was concerned with the idea that USSA would be using SGB resources to conduct the drive. ‘ ‘ ‘ While Devanath insisted that the only SGB resource USSA would use would be the meeting room, Haddad said, ‘Our forum and notoriety is a resource that can be used for an end.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ Haddad added that SGB should be cautious in presuming that all Pitt students are in favor of USSA’s actions and that the board is obligated to represent everyone. He suggested that instead of urging Colorado voters to take a stand against the issue in their state, a better use of time would be to educate Pitt students in case the matter makes its way to Pennsylvania.’ ‘ ‘ ‘ Devanath said affirmative action is a Pitt issue. ‘Just because this issue doesn’t affect a majority doesn’t mean we should ignore it,’ she said yesterday. ‘ ‘ ‘ Devanath’s passion in this initiative is evident and indicative of a worthy leader. But Haddad’s concerns are legitimate and should be taken into consideration. To champion such a cause on behalf of SGB and on behalf of University students is unethical. ‘ ‘ ‘ It’s also largely irrelevant because the issue is currently central to Colorado voters, not Pennsylvanians. The best route to take, at this point, is Haddad’s ‘mdash; inform Pitt students about both Connerly’s and USSA’s positions so they will be prepared if Pennsylvania is ever at stake. ‘ ‘ ‘ Regardless of whether Devanath’s goals are worthy, Haddad ultimately deserves praise for keeping political ethics in mind and making sure the students are included in the matter. If anything, the controversy at Tuesday’s SGB meeting proves that the board needs to hold more discussion regarding this issue, hopefully at next week’s meeting.