Student Congress cuts college Republicans
Published August 30, 2013
by Benmcsmith, CR Daily, August 28, 2013.
In a seemingly shocking move, the UNC Student Congress voted to cut the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill College Republican’s budget from last year by 75% in one fell swoop.
On Tuesday August 27, 2013, the UNC College Republicans appeared in front of the Student Congress Finance Committee to request an allocation of funds from Student Congress for the upcoming semester. The money (about $8,000) would have covered most of the expenses of two speakers: Katie Pavlich and Ann McElhinny.
Katie Pavlich is a New York Times number one best seller, Fast and Furious: Barack Obama’s Bloodiest Scandal and Its Shameless Cover-Up, and editor of Townhall.com. She is extremely well known for her heated debates against Piers Morgan both in studio and on Twitter regarding gun control. Ms. Pavlich was expected to come speak on current gun issues on campus and across North Carolina
Ann McElhinny is the co-producer, along with her husband, of the movie FrackNation, and known for her work in exposing the hypocrisy of the environmental movement in her previous documentary Mine Your Own Business. Ann is known for her confrontational style and ability to discuss the issue across both ideological lines.
College Republican treasurer Amy Ellmers was there to present the budget in front of Student Congress. After giving her presentation on the budget, she was asked to defend the $8,000 allocation the College Republican Executive Board had request from student congress. Despite the repeated attempts to remind the Finance Committee about the previous successes, including the more than $12,000 spent on procuring the John Stossel and Howard Dean debate, in which close to 600 people came, and Stossel filmed his show for Fox News in the Great Hall the next day, Student Congress arbitrarily cut funding to $3000.
Chair of the College Republicans Peter McClelland and Student Congress member broke down the numbers for the Carolina Review. “The average cut from people that received funds on Tuesday was 14.6%. The Median cut was 4.7%.” He continued, “Our cut was 62.2% from our request. The numbers for last year’s annual appropriations are not readily available on the Congress website, but we had about $12,500, which means this is $24.72% of what was appropriated to us the last time we appeared before Congress.” That constitutes a 75.28% cut! He concluded, “even adjusted to a semester basis, it is a pittance of what was allocated before, 49.44% of per semester allocations.”
The question remains as to why did Student Congress cut most of their funds, even after all the successes of the College Republicans.
August 30, 2013 at 10:36 am
Richard Bunce says:
I am assuming the money allocated by the Student Congress comes from student fees... so go demand a refund of your students fees and be prepared to take the University to Court if necessary. I expect this organization will receive many donations on this story spreads on the Internet. Perhaps the ACLU will help with the lawsuit.
August 30, 2013 at 1:36 pm
Robert White says:
Don't you a just love the liberal mindset that is all about fairness & dissenting opinions being welcome? They are so welcoming of different ideas & viewpoints. And these young minds who probably are looking for numerous handouts as I write this are probably some of those most accepting of others.
I dearly hope some of these 'fair & accepting' liberal cry babies come looking for work where I do the hiring. I've got many life lessons I can't wait to educate them on.
August 30, 2013 at 4:26 pm
Charlotte Stewart says:
The funding wasn't "cut"; an appropriations request was approved for less money than they had asked for. All groups had to "defend" their requests. At least one other group also had most of their request denied, for similar speaker events. Groups who got most of their funding requests approved had sought outside financial assistance before making a request with money that is supposed to benefit all UNC students, and/or had planned events in collaboration with other departments or organizations to maximize community appeal. I was at the meeting and the woman who made the request seemed unprepared to answer questions about their fundraising strategy or even whether she had tried to negotiate the rather large speaker fees. Full disclosure, I also submitted a request, most of which was approved, because our group had bothered to minimize costs from student fees by securing outside funding; furthermore, we invited speakers who didn't require thousands of dollars to come-- the honor of speaking at UNC was enough recompense. We did have part of our funding request denied due to a regulation I had overlooked (entirely my bad) and because the committee felt we could get the remainder covered from other sources; so we shall. The folks from the CR who were at the meeting seemed bright and motivated, and their events sounded very interesting; I am confident that they will have little trouble seeking the support they need from outside sources, as all groups are encouraged to do.
August 30, 2013 at 5:43 pm
dj anderson says:
Censorship via "speaker suppression" at Chapel Hill? Say it ain't so.
I see this like book burning, it makes even non-readers wonder what is written in the books. Liberals don't want fellow liberals to watch Fox TV, which they demean as Faux, and try to diminish its influence amap (as much as possible). Do you think Republicans can capitalize on this as much as Democrats would if reversed? See the PR effectiveness Democrats have had with voter suppression. Democrats are masters of ridicule, finger pointing, media attention, emotional appeals, but Republicans seem to be masters of none of that, so what are they masters at? Well, they can keep supporting a notion without diluting it with compromise.
August 30, 2013 at 6:50 pm
Norm Kelly says:
The blogger appears to answer his own question: "even after all the successes of the College Republican"
The chances of the majority on the Congress being "liberal" is virtually guaranteed. They took this opportunity to cut College Republicans because the Republican state government "cut" college funding. In addition, no liberal wants to see successes for any Republican.
The outcome was predictable.
August 31, 2013 at 12:52 am
Patriciaa Batko says:
It's time for college Republicans to practice what all Republicans preach: stop depending on government funds for, in this case, student activities. While the John Stossel, Howard Dean debate must have been a quality educational experience, I suspect most college students could cough up $20 for admission to it if such an event were important enough.
While the budget cuts to the student group sounds harsh and politically motivated, this is an excellent chance to show others what economic conservatives really believe.
August 31, 2013 at 11:49 am
Richard Bunce says:
Yes... and not pay a portion of their Student Fee that covers such activities as well.
August 31, 2013 at 1:02 pm
Charlotte Stewart says:
I think it would be helpful to post my earlier comment detailing the reasons the funding request wasn't 100% approved. I was actually there when it happened, and my comment includes helpful advice for the future. Furthermore, if the CR members had remained at the meeting for another half hour, they would have seen another political group go through a very similar process and have their request substantially decreased as well.
