Due to a lack of transparency in ASUCD and the UC Davis administration, the passing and campaign of Ballot Measure 1 has been needlessly hindered. Elections started on Feb. 18 and end Feb. 21 at 8 a.m. On Feb. 11, in an urgent senate meeting, the UC Davis Administration (Student Affairs) introduced the UC Davis Policies and Procedures Manual (PPM) to the table.

Associate Vice Chancellor Milton Lang and Student Affairs Comptroller Tracy Bennett made a presentation voicing Student Affairs’ disapproval of language in Ballot Measure 1 with regard to statements about fair wages, the oversight board and return to aid. The PPM outlined the campus’ requirements for student fee initiatives, but it was obvious that no one besides administration knew what they were, where to find them or that they even existed.

The administrators suggested raising the required 25 percent fee to 43 percent to follow campus practice. The majority of the table expressed disapproval of a change in the fee a week before elections started, especially since no one knew about the 43 percent procedure before it was suggested.

In addition to raising the fee, Student Affairs suggested that Student Services Fees and Administrative Advisory Committee (SSFAAC) be responsible for future oversight of the fee revenue instead of the Campus Media Board. SSFAAC advises the chancellor, the provost and executive vice chancellor through Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Adela de la Torre to determine specific allocations of fees for the campus.

The authors of the bill chose Campus Media Board to oversee the potential fee revenue to avoid administration involvement in an independent, student-run news source. After discussion and a possible compromise to change oversight to SSFAAC with a formal recommendation from Campus Media Board, senators brought the ASUCD bylaws and constitution to attention. ASUCD President Carly Sandstrom brought the PPM up, and the contradiction of campus policy and student government bylaws was apparent.

Making any changes to the ballot measure a week before elections (the bylaw states that there needs to be four weeks before elections for changes to happen) would void the fee initiative on ASUCD’s end, but Student Affairs has the ability to kill the fee initiative based on virtually unknown campus policies. Even Internal Affairs Commission Chair Spencer McManus stated that the PPM isn’t the first Google search result.

At 4:15 p.m., Lang brought up his 5 p.m. deadline and demanded that the table take action. For 45 minutes, the room tried to figure its way around ASUCD bylaws and campus policies to prevent the ballot measure from being removed by higher level administrators, and the conclusion was to send a revised draft of the bill to UC Office of the President (UCOP) to be reviewed. Later that night, Editor in Chief Elizabeth Orpina forwarded along The Aggie’s plan to follow the Educational Outreach section of the PPM — Bennett responded two days later informing the senate that the measure would be reviewed by UCOP in five days’ time (the middle of elections).

During the senate meeting on Feb. 13, the senators who were not present at the urgent meeting two days prior were brought up to date on the situation. But that didn’t stop the room from debating the unchangeable fee for an hour. The main concern for the table was whether to “take the blow” for the inefficiencies of ASUCD and UC Davis administration communication.

The California Aggie did nothing wrong in the creating, the writing or the promotion of the ballot measure, according to the ASUCD bylaws and constitution. However, due to the lack of transparency in the UC Davis administration and ASUCD because of high turnover in higher-level positions, Ballot Measure 1 is in the hands of UCOP.

At the time of publishing, Sandstrom reported that Corbett had met with Lang and that no one knew what UCOP’s decision was. The five day deadline was not met, and campaigners are left wondering if there’s a ballot measure or not.

Have you ever joined a group or talked to people because you were lonely? For example, many of us feel uncomfortable eating alone in the dining commons, so we invite people that we do not really know to accompany us. Others join clubs or Greek life for a sense of companionship.

Why are we so lonely? Upon coming to college, many of us feel lonely as we are away from the love of our families. Those who, like me, were rejected by peers in grade school suffer even more. We often find that minor acquaintances only make us miss home and those who love us.

Loneliness is a mental state, not an external circumstance. For example, we can be in a crowd, but feel lonely. On the other hand, we can be alone in the Arboretum yet not feel lonely. Being alone is not the same as being lonely.

We feel lonely when we cannot connect to others by sharing ourselves. However, loneliness is not a weak or a shameful trait. Even the greatest souls feel it. While on the cross, Jesus cried, “Lord, Lord, why hast thou forsaken me?” Loneliness is a necessary part of the human experience, driving us to incredible good or incredible despair. For some, loneliness drives introspection and self-discovery. In this silence, some achieve enlightenment. Others, however, cannot take it and fall into deep despair.

If we cannot handle being alone, often due to worries, we seek out others to distract ourselves. Unfortunately, many of us do not find the right people. Out of desperation, we often associate ourselves with negative or highly stressed people who are just as desperate as we are. This sad environment drains us. Here is an email from a real student about this phenomenon:

“I have been struggling very hard lately. I have been making myself miserable. I am in a sorority and I don’t want to be in it. I have been doing it because I am afraid I won’t have friends if I drop out of it. I also have felt pressure from my mom and other people to stay a part of it. I know that this is not giving me inner peace. […] I need to do what I feel right in my heart. I think it may be scary to let go and venture into the unknown. I also think it may be very freeing. I need to develop the courage to stand alone and do what I believe will bring me that inner peace.”

Many times, the companion is a boy/girlfriend. Both sides are desperately looking for someone else to give them love, just like beggars. However, beggars on the street know they cannot get anything by begging from another beggar! We, unfortunately, often do not realize this and instead distract ourselves with what we can give, sex. These “relationships” often violently break up when one person realizes the other cannot give unconditional love, which often leaves emotional scars that last forever.

Instead, we should make real connections by spending time with those who share our ideas and values, those we can share our fears, stresses and joys with. These people are around us; we only need to become aware. For example, many clubs, research labs and gatherings are filled with positive energy. These events can be recognized by their members’ enthusiasm, openness and honesty. These are real friends; friends who will support us unconditionally no matter what we do. Being in a positive, loving environment uplifts us and gives us strength to love others.

Across the world, millions of people have pets to uplift them. Pets love unconditionally; they are always there for us no matter what we do. Their companionship uplifts us and gives us strength. Even a “minor” pet like a hamster or rat gives us something to love and to love us.

Spending time in a positive environment gives us the courage to be alone. By spending time in silence, we become comfortable with whom we are and thus gain self-esteem. While it may be scary to be alone in silence at first, it will become easier with practice. Do not fight your fear; that is like invading a hostile country. The invasion unites the enemy and gives it courage. Instead, refuse to attend to your fears; when they come, let them go. This approach is like besieging a city by starving it, which leads to a rapid, bloodless surrender.

The goal is to be comfortable with yourself and thus not require others for happiness. Anyone can leave you at any moment, but you will always have yourself. If all you need to be happy is yourself, you will always be happy.

To break the walls of isolation, share your experiences with loneliness with WILLIAM CONNER at wrconner@ucdavis.edu.

The GMO debate is like a dark stormy ocean. It is vast and deep, and most people are unsure as to whether GMOs are the monstrous waves or the boat delivering us to safety. A significant amount of literature has been published on the impacts of GMOs, and this column is only a couple hundred words. I will not attempt to address every single argument for or against GMOs but will instead discuss the socioeconomic impacts of GMOs on the hungry people they are supposedly trying to feed — an argument rarely heard.

The argument is largely unheard, because it is made by people with less power and voice. These people lack the volume and political clout that seed companies, such as Monsanto, have. These people — the rural producers, the small land holders, the subsistence farmers — are battling for fundamental food sovereignty.

The food movement has made a considerable amount of noise surrounding the concept of food security without understanding food sovereignty. Food security is about having access to food. It is a bandage for hunger, not a cure. Access to food alone neither ensures the economic standing to purchase it nor does it ensure long-term, dependable access.

Food sovereignty, on the other hand, is about autonomy within the food system. It means having actual power to ensure that communities have resources enough to feed themselves. It involves breaking the chains of dependency of corporate and commodified food systems.

Genetically modified (GM) crops are the antithesis of food sovereignty. For thousands of years, farmers have retained the autonomy to save their own seed — until now. Farmers who used to save their own, free, open-pollinated varieties now plant GM crops that must be purchased annually. A Guatemalan peasant farmer cannot be sovereign while their sustenance is entirely dependent on an seed and pesticide company from the United States.

Some argue that small farmers prefer GM seed without considering the political coercion that broke the seed saving ethic in the first place. Let’s consider small holding maize farmers in Mexico as an example.

There are essentially two types of GM corn on the market. The first is Bt corn, which is engineered to be resistant to a pest called the corn borer. The other is corn that is engineered to be resistant to herbicides, such as RoundUp. One might wonder why the Mexican government or Mexican farmers would plant Bt corn when they learn that corn borers are not a pest in Mexico.

Additionally, Mexican farmers plant at a small scale where all the work is done by hand. GM corn resistant to herbicides is designed for large scale, fuel intensive agriculture using tractor implements. In Mexico, herbicides are applied and mixed by hand in ways that even GMO proponents recognize as unsafe.

Now, consider that GM corn does not store as long as traditional varieties. Farmers used to be able to store their traditional varieties for an entire year until the next harvest. With GM corn, small farmers must process and sell immediately or risk the entire crop succumbing to spoilage, producing enough for sustenance but worsening the quality.

Thus, in the months preceding harvest, corn supplies dwindle and farmers must actually buy back corn they sold earlier in the year. Their food sovereignty has been co-opted by GM corporate interest.

Because the market in the United States for GM corn is completely saturated and the European Union has banned GM crops entirely, seed and pesticide companies are aggressively marketing to Central and South America — despite the fact that GM crops provide little benefit for those farmers. Bt crops are useless; pesticides are sold to people without adequate infrastructure to apply them safely; and in many cases, GM crops actually lead to hunger.

From the perspective of the average person in the United States, GM crops may seem like a boon for the developing world, but they aren’t. People in Central and South America may be hungry, but it’s not because they lack the knowledge of how to feed themselves. It is because seed and pesticide companies with the help of corrupt governments have systematically devalued their worth and stripped them of their ability to be autonomous.

To share seeds and increase your own food sovereignty with ELLEN PEARSON, email erpearson@ucdavis.edu.

A very common favorite book is J.D. Salinger’s Catcher in the Rye. Although I don’t think that taste is something one can objectively judge when it comes to the art of literature or music, I still make snide internal remarks when someone tells me Salinger’s acclaimed masterpiece was the book they keep closest to their hearts.

I acknowledge that there are many interpretations of this book, one of which is a young man struggling with depression. If that’s you, don’t ever let anyone hate on you for loving this book. You do you booboo.

However, you may be familiar with that one guy who’s always talking about how everyone is fake, and is constantly complaining about the minutia of his pretty nice life. He’s in that group of people that say Catcher is their favorite book, but for less admirable and more superficial reasons. For those readers, I ascertain two crucial facts about them: 1. They are privileged. 2. They like to whine.

Salinger is an incredible writer and he can really tell the story of an unmotivated, affluent white kid struggling with a normal existential teenage crisis in a way that makes it sounds less, well, stupid. Basically, a climactic dilemma in the book is, “I don’t want to tell my parents I got kicked out of school, so instead of spending the night in our fancy New York City apartment, I’m going to spend a couple hours on a park bench.” To make matters worse, this moment of monumental difficulty then makes no reference to all the people who sleep on park benches regularly, or how his privilege has affected his understanding of the cold, etc.

The next time something not quite awful happens to you, but you want to make an internet hyperbole about it, in lieu of #firstworldproblems, just follow it with #catcherintherye. That way, not only will your enigmatic blanket statement get the usual slews of “What happened?” and “OMG are you okay?” but people will also think you are smart and maybe judge you less when you never clarify why you’re feeling so terrible … even though you wanted everyone to know in the first place.

Examples of this include, “Everything is melting around me” when your dishwasher malfunctions, and “I just don’t understand life anymore” when your cat pees on the carpet. Just like Salinger was within his right to soliloquize about the intense struggle of being extremely wealthy, you are within your right to sulk about a B+ and then write about it on the internet.

I must give a certain amount of credit to Catcher, in that it is very germane to the lives of many college students, most of whom are in the group that reference the book as their fave read. Although there exist plenty of people on campus who have had seriously tough lives, there also exists a sizable group whose biggest day-to-day problems include not getting their mustaches to curl up well enough at the ends, or getting their Uggs dirty. For those people, Salinger is like a god who can project their struggle with prosperity in a melancholic novel filled with exaggerated woe.

I heard someone once say that “just because something more terrible happened to someone else, does not mean you cannot feel sad about the bad things that happen to you.” I wholeheartedly agree with this — sometimes it’s completely legitimate to get caught up with the small, shitty things in life (especially, as previously mentioned, if due to extraneous circumstances like depression). All I’m trying to say is that I expect a little more from someone’s favorite book than a dramatic account of a week in the life of a privileged young man.

So to bourgeois guys whingeing about fake people: step back, contextualize your problems. I ended up being assigned Chinua Achebe’s Things Fall Apart right in the middle of reading Catcher In the Rye. That’s heavy.

These days, it’s midterm season, and I’m sure that there will be plenty of dramatic posts about the fragility of our existence and the pointlessness of this thing we call academia. “Why even bother?” some may ask their plethora of Facebook friends … and then never follow up on the answer.

You can help these lost souls and maybe quote some Salinger (because it’s true that, as much as we think our time at UC Davis might sometimes be a waste, learning teaches us about our own minds, and that is never a futile effort): “If you go along with it any considerable distance, [an academic education will] begin to give you an idea what [kind of] mind you have.”

Or, you could troll them. I recommend a solid troll by commenting #catcherintherye.

To come up with hashtags with EREN KAVVAS, you should email her at ebkavvas@ucdavis.edu.

“UC Davis Life Hacks.” Now there’s an article I would have really appreciated reading as a CCC student. Before I transferred here, I had a lot of fears, anticipations and ultimately false ideas of what UC Davis was like and what life as a UC student would entail.

Before transferring, I always felt like there were these tidbits of information that were completely inaccessible to me.

I didn’t have a lot of friends attending UCs that I could turn to for advice, I knew no one at my CCC would be able to guide me and I didn’t place a lot of confidence in anything I’d read online about student life or the perils of the UC system.

Now that I’ve been here for over a year, almost all of my questions, concerns and anxieties have been remedied. As comforting as that is, I still really would have appreciated a heads up on some of those things.

So here it is.

Dear 2012 Transfer Student Sarah,

Hi there. I know you’ve been working very hard at your CCC and that you have some concerns about your upcoming transition into UC life. I also know that you’re probably too intimidated to talk about these issues because they seem rather silly.

But don’t worry, I’ve got all the answers for you! The first one being, yes, some of your concerns about UC life are hilariously dopey. So let’s all take a second to laugh at you. Ha ha ha.

Ok, moving on.

1. Not all of your UC classes will be filled with hundreds of students in gigantic lecture halls. The majority of your classes will only have 30 to 40 people in them and you’ll all sit in these really uncomfortable desk things. In the winter, all of the seats will be wet from the rain and in the summer, your thighs will literally stick to them. Enjoy.

2. Not every UC student is smart. You don’t need to be intimidated. Every class, every discussion and every lecture will always produce that one student who can’t comprehend the fact that a syllabus lists the date, the topic of discussion and then the homework assignment due before the next class.

Yes this is a true story and yes this will happen more than once.

Also, the UCs employ this cool thing called “discussion.” It’s a mode of teaching that catalyzes students to take control of the direction of a class. It’s cool and it’ll show you that, just like at your CCC, there are a lot of students who are smarter than you and some that are dumber.

3. You are going to be required to do some work outside of class, but no one will really explain this to you. Obviously, you’ll have homework assignments to do — but you’re also going to have to spend some time catching up.

There will be a bit of a gap in your education that you’ll need to bridge — on your own time. Your CCC didn’t teach you everything you need to know and your UC assumes you have a certain foundation of knowledge. That disparity is going to require some outside work. Sorry.

4. It won’t be that hard to get into contact with the important people. Because your classes only have 30 to 40 students in them, your professors will know who you are and will want to talk to you in office hours.

There are also these neat people called “TAs” that you haven’t experienced before. They’re great.

Your academic advisors also aren’t that difficult to get into contact with. Even cooler, they’re actually helpful here. They won’t just hand you a piece of paper with a list of required classes. They have advice, guidance and knowledge.

Ugh, and good luck finding the Letters & Science advising office. Again, we’ll take a moment to laugh at you.

5. Don’t freak out and yes you can do this. This can be a terribly intimidating process. But this can also be the best experience of your life. And I think it will be.

I hope this helps you a bit.

Sincerely,

Future Spring 2014 Graduate Sarah

If you have any other nuggets of advice for either 2012 Future Transfer student, or 2014 Future Graduate SARAH MARSHALL, email her at smmarshall@ucdavis.edu.

The immigrant experience is difficult to sum up in a way that would be apt for the reader. It might very well be a failure on my part, in my own narrative skills, that keeps me from communicating the thoughts and emotions that have seen me through the years. It’s hard to describe the experience of living and growing in a country which did not see my birth, and yet has seen fit to grant me the privilege of permanent resident status (a bit of a scary proposition — permanency is not something I take kindly to).

It is because of this that I’ve opted for a general survey of the issue rather than a personal narrative, but with the steadfast belief that our stories are what make us, and what we make of the world.

The politics of immigration are by their very nature transitory, beholden to social moods and the overall national atmosphere. Some years back in 1986 the United States underwent its last major immigration reform known — fittingly enough — as the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986. The run up to its passage prompted a national reaction which bordered on the obscene, with critics of the Reagan amnesty (not something you would think to associate “the Gipper” with right?) lamenting its immediate failure to stem the tide of Aliens (I think I would have been a great Martian in a different life and dimension) beaming across the border.

Communities across the U.S. were socialized in a way that, for many, didn’t seem possible until the instant it happened. Overnight, millions were given the proverbial key to the so-called American dream, or so it seemed. The tangible benefits were apparent, namely a recognition of basic social existence for those who qualified for the legalization program (the requirements were a presence in the country prior to 1982, among others), and a dispelling of the once constant fear of deportation and familial breakdown. But the legislation’s passage did little to address the primary drivers of immigration and the ongoing plight of entire U.S. communities living in fear.

Of course there was the Control bit of the act which also ran its course — a general maligning of the immigrant population as something to be controlled and maneuvered any which way as long as it stayed within its boundaries and served its purpose as an economically viable source of cheap labor and political scapegoating. All in all, the country got what it wanted: some three million hereto un-American lawbreakers (as some are so quick to paint us as) were on their way to legal status, its politicians allowed themselves a pat on the back and the issue of immigration was once again shelved and forgotten as it had been before.

And now we find ourselves in 2014 mulling over the exact same problems as before. Only this time the number of irregular immigrants stands at 11 million, and wouldn’t you know it, some among us are making their voices heard loud and clear. The battles being waged by activists across the country for the passage of legislation like the DREAM Act and an immediate end to mass deportations is something that should make any civic-minded United Statesian (if you’ll indulge me and my language crusade) proud of what can be accomplished in our much touted system of democracy and citizen action.

However the question ultimately rests not solely on political maneuvering in Congress, or the much desired process of comprehensive reform (with a path towards legalization as a core policy) and through it a hoped-for legitimization. It is a question which will find its true answer in the social realm in a process that goes beyond the traditionally-assumed paradigm of the melting pot narrative or government provided legitimacy, to the critical openings of societal acceptance and cultural understanding.

JORGE JUAREZ, jnjuarez@ucdavis.edu, would like to share some truth from the poet Beau Sia: “If there’s one thing I’ve learned from the immigrant experience, is that a silenced heart is one that never loves.” So speak always.

Students are known for their brazen disregard for convention. Their skeptical approach to the status quo. Over the years, universities like UC Davis have been at the forefront of progress in civilization, from the apartheid boycotts to protests against increasing student fees and growing income inequality to a dichotomy unseen since the Gilded Age.

I’m not saying that student media enabled these stands against injustice, but student media helped document these movements and give them a voice, unfiltered by malignant administration bureaucrats and their sanctioned publications or corporate-run media outlets looking to stoke an emotional response from their audiences in place of educating them.

The Aggie was there to document the infamous pepper spraying incident of 2011 and their photographers were launched into the international spotlight with the work they did. Al Jazeera plagiarized Aggie TV’s interview with Chancellor Linda P.B. Katehi, putting their watermark over AGTV’s.

Maybe student activism isn’t your thing, and in that case take a look at the educational value of student media. Both of the above incidents resulted in teachable moments about fair use, copyright laws and gave student journalists a glimpse of covering crisis.

Yes, it’s also no secret that student media is prone to making mistakes, but those mistakes are also teachable moments — not just for student journalists, but the UC Davis community as a whole. Those mistakes can be painful and divisive, much like the Jungle Fever column that resulted in one of the most intense Media Board meetings in recent history.

These teachable moments are unique to student-run media and cannot be taught in the lecture hall. All of us are better on the other side of them and that is exactly what should happen in atmosphere of experimentation and exploration that the University fosters.

Please save student media and open the door for future generations to benefit from the same, sometimes painful, teachable moments that can give a student their first steps in their journey to becoming a professional.

As students, you are not just beneficiaries of the institutions you inhabit, but stewards of an increasingly endangered resource. $9.30 is a minuscule price to pay for invaluable experiences vital to the development of tomorrow’s media professionals.

Even better, if you really want to improve these institutions firsthand, I encourage you to attend volunteer meetings for an ASUCD media outlet — The Aggie, Aggie TV and KDVS. It might change your life. Careers have been made, spouses have met and educations have been augmented beyond what the classroom can provide.

Plus, it’s fun as hell.

Neil Ruud

Former KDVS 90.3fm General Manager

UC Davis Class of 2012