To the editor,
The Cannabis Reform Coalition office fiasco should be troubling to anyone concerned about student rights.
The bumping of the CRC from the new cubicle in Room 409 – vital as it is for the ongoing functioning of the group – is secondary to the original loss of Room 322.
The “vandalism” excuse is without merit. No one knows who did it. It was probably a sympathizer, though not a member. But it could have as easily been an enemy aiming to discredit.
The CRC has been a large presence in student life at UMass for almost 25 years. It stood the test of time, as one of the most active fighters for real change, among all the RSOs. Evicting them from 322, their home for over 10 years, with virtually no notice, and no opportunity for appeal, was particularly noxious. Even more, it was an assault on the principle of seniority.
Seniority, along with other neutral criteria, has been recognized as the very definition of fairness, all around the world, and throughout human history. This is precisely because it provides insulation from arbitrary action, favoritism and political interference.
Interference and harassment is a special threat – whether from the SGA, the University administration or from off-campus authorities – faced by any group engaged in a controversial issue fraught with scapegoating and bigotry. Opposition to marijuana prohibition certainly qualifies.
A small example of interference which many may not remember … in the 1990s the CRC gained the right to a negative check-off fee (like MassPIRG) in an all-campus election. It was summarily vetoed by the administration. If such a referendum were again to be on the ballot during the spring SGA election … does anyone have any doubt that it would pass? Furthermore, voter turnout, compared to other SGA elections in recent years, would also give a clear indication as to which group represents student interests.
Terry Franklin
Amherst
To the editor,
I could not believe that RSOs were reallocated this year, but I understand how the SGA and school policy work, being a former officer of an RSO. What I really could not believe was that the CRC then lost its office for an entire year! I would like to know, did the administration try to find the actual vandal? Was there due process when the CRC lost its office space? Does the SGA have the authority to take office space away from an RSO in the manner that they did? RSOs must follow very strict guidelines; the SGA is no exception.
Adam Freed
