Last-minute student event upstages TPUSA speaker
While a conservative speaker implored his audience to “Put God First!” dozens of student organizations, local businesses, churches, and artisans celebrated diversity, shared art, and danced to live music late into the night at Spring FLARE.
This story follows up on “Admin at MTU subverts student self-governance,” and “After paying conservative speaker, questions linger, answers are sparse.”
While a conservative speaker implored his audience to “Put God First!” dozens of student organizations, local businesses, churches, and artisans celebrated diversity, shared art, and danced to live music late into the night at Spring FLARE.
TPUSA speaker Brandon Tatum spoke Tuesday at Michigan Tech, but was overshadowed by an event organized last minute by students that attracted hundreds more attendees. Despite opaque communication from the University around campus safety protocol, both events occurred with little incident, save for a verbal altercation between a student and Brandon Tatum during his event.
Tatum’s Talk
Brandon Tatum’s event “BE BRAVE with Brandon Tatum” took place in the largest classroom on campus, Fisher 135. Students and community members were asked to sign in on a laptop before filing into the lecture hall that prominently featured a QR code to “Ask Brandon a question.”
Tatum began his event by addressing the funding controversy last month that threatened to prevent the usage of student funds to cover $3,500 of his $10,000 speaking fee. Tatum expressed his thanks to Turning Point staff and school administrators for securing funding for his event.
“I'm very thankful that you guys fought for me to be here, right now in this place, and I believe God has called us to do something special here, and I appreciate you guys,” he said.
Tatum also sought to “set the record straight” regarding opponents of funding his event, citing a history of queer-phobic rhetoric.
“If you’re gay, straight, trans. It ain't none of my business, I don't care. You don't pay my bills, I don't pay your bills,” he said.
Brandon Tatum responds to a bi-racial student asking why Tatum does not consider Barack Obama to be black. Photo by Juxta Sprague.
During Tatum’s hour-long event he expressed a number of opinions including that, “drag-queen story hour [...] is leading towards pedophilia,” that “America is not a racist country,” and that “Black Lives Matter was nothing but a money grab.”
Tatum also offered up some anecdotes from his time as a police officer.
“Everyone I arrested out here smoking drugs, doing crime, and destroying communities, they had free healthcare. They'd go and get bludgeoned, and drunk, and get to the hospital and spend $30,000 on their medical bill, and they don't give a flying flip.”
After stating that Barack Obama is “not Black,” a student with a pride pin in the front row stood up and loudly asked Tatum to clarify his statement. After a brief back and forth discussing Obama’s bi-racial heritage, Tatum stated, “With all due respect, Barack Obama isn’t Black because he has a drop of Black in him. [...] What makes my son Black? He is 50/50. He is half White, half Black. There’s no way to call him Black unless you want the White race to be pure.”
Tatum then queried the student on their own racial heritage, to which they responded, “I’m White and Hispanic, there’s multitudes.”
Tatum also spoke at length about how he considered redlining to be a myth.
“It's not about redlining that I saw, or anything that had anything to do with the government, the reason that Black communities were suffering so much. It was culture and personal responsibility. [...] Unfortunately, Black people, in my opinion, in inner cities have adopted this culture that's destructive.”
Tatum went on to blame Black people defaulting on home loans as a principle cause of the 2008 financial crash.
Tatum concluded his event by saying, “If you forget everything I say, just put God first.”
Caleb Glenn, the president of Turning Point USA at Michigan Tech, said the event had over 300 attendees.
“The event was a great success. Both students and members of the community came out to show their support. I believe that the impact on campus was a step towards more people, regardless of political belief, standing up for what they believe in.”
Glenn also stated that his student organization aims to host at least one speaker per semester.
-
Due to numerous questions and concerns about potential violence related to Turning Point USA’s event, this reporter reached out to the Michigan Tech administrators to better understand how the University evaluates the safety of on campus events and public speakers.
University General Counsel Sarah Schulte explained that they have professionals in risk analysis who evaluate every event and presenter on campus. Schulte did not provide specifics on whom the professionals are, beyond that Michigan Tech’s department of Public Safety and Police Services is the lead on the evaluation process.“If there were an instance where there were actual threats of violence, and like I've said we haven't had that since I have been here at Michigan Tech, then I would be pulled into that conversation and others in leadership would be pulled into that conversation."
Schulte, when asked if students, faculty, or staff had any input on the safety evaluation process, said that anyone can bring information forward, but that decision-making power remains solely with University professionals.“When specific allegations are made regarding a speaker with respect to incitement of violence, that is something that is reviewed to determine whether or not that is a concern for the speech that is anticipated to be given here.”
When asked how students, faculty, or staff could relay their concerns about on campus events, the University provided a link to the Dean of Students office Report a Concern page.“Concerns about events can be directed to the organizations who host the events and to the appropriate university professionals and/or units responsible for overseeing the event.”
The University declined to comment on the recent reassignment of the former Dean of Students Dr. Wallace Southerland to an advisory role within the University and directed this reporter to an announcement made in Tech Today regarding “Leadership Transitions”.
The University also stated that they have not been made aware of any allegations or complaints against Turning Point USA’s speaker Brandon Tatum.
Spring FLARE Exceeds Expectations
Spring FLARE (Festival of Love, Arts, Radiance, & Empowerment) was hosted in the lobby of the Rozsa Center for the Performing Arts. Before the event even began it was bustling with activity from all the student groups, businesses, and artists setting up booths and chatting with each other. A steady stream of students and community members soon joined the event as the first band was tuning.
The first half of the four-hour event was a fair featuring 33 booths. It included 20 student organizations, a mix of ten businesses and community organizations, and eight artists. Several local faith communities were also present, with clergy and staff helping run booths and interacting with students. The second half of the event was a live concert with half a dozen bands and a dance floor.
The size and success of FLARE came as a surprise even to those involved in organizing the event. Gabriel Ahrendt, a doctorate student in the Geological Sciences and co-organizer of the event, spoke about the experience of making FLARE a reality in less than three weeks.
“We filled up our lineup. We filled out all of the booths. [...] It was very nice to just walk downtown, and walk between businesses and see how many people had heard about the TPUSA event and who had wanted to support our event because of it. [...] It started out as a kind of counter event to the TPUSA thing, but then in the end when we started getting so much support from the community, we were like, why don't we just throw a big event that could be cool for everyone.”
In regard to event safety at FLARE, one of the event organizers and co-president of Keweenaw Pride, Kieran Rowan, stated that they had relied upon participants to create a culture that would stand up to hate. Additionally, they coordinated with trained supporters of the event to intervene should any conflicts arise.
“We did not directly [engage] with public safety or administration, as we wanted to emphasize our faith in the actions and beliefs of our community,” Rowan said.
Attendees of Spring FLARE converse and visit various booths in the lobby of the Rozsa Center for the Performing Arts. Photo by Juxta Sprague.
The last minute event was undoubtedly a hit, with many attendees and supporters expressing hope that this was just the start of an annual tradition.
William Keith, an associate professor in the Mathematical Sciences department, said, “The people who organized FLARE [...] certainly brought together a fantastic group of people, and I'd be happy to see more like this in the future.”
JoHannah Green, president of Michigan Tech’s Law Club, also expressed her interest in seeing FLARE return.
“Honestly, If this was an annual event, that would be amazing.”
The event finished up late in the evening with a full dance floor as the last band finished their set to cheers and applause.
The Rozsa Center reported 501 attendees at FLARE from their door clickers, in addition to an estimated 50 people running booths and facilitating the event.
Librarians protect our right to choose what we read
“My neighbor shouldn’t be making decisions about what I can read.”
Remember the magical rhymes of Dr. Suess, and the enchantment of Charlotte’s Web? The Chicago Public Library recently removed six Dr. Suess books from its shelves, citing racism. Charlotte’s Web has been banned elsewhere because it features talking animals. And in lower Michigan, a small public library is closing after residents twice voted to defund it because the library refused to remove LGBTQ books from its collection.
Librarians are facing a crisis few of them dreamed of when they chose their career: calls for book banning from a small but vocal minority that is gaining political power across the country.
Intellectual Freedom vs. Censorship
“There is a coordinated national attack on the ideals we hold most dear, which is access for all, to all,” says Kristin Fontichiaro, who teaches library science at the University of Michigan’s School of Information. “It’s important to realize that loud voices are not always majority voices. Surveys have shown that the majority of Americans do not want books banned.”
Director of the Portage Lake District Library, Katrina Linde-Moriarty, amid the books at the library, reading to children. Photo by Jennifer Donovan.
Katrina Linde-Moriarty, director of the Portage Lake District Library in Houghton, agrees.
“At the heart of librarianship has always been equitable, free and confidential access to information,” Linde-Moriarty, who prefers they/them pronouns, said. “Librarians stand up against censorship or efforts by others to control what books and other materials can be in the library. A librarian’s role is defending intellectual freedom and providing equitable access to information and resources.”
A challenge has already arisen locally, where a group of parents protested the Hancock School Library’s posting of a display of LGBTQ books during Pride Month. The Hancock library is operated under a contract between the Portage Lake District Library and the Hancock Public Schools.
Linde-Moriarty believes that library patrons can choose for themselves what books and other materials they want to engage with. So does Fontichiaro.
“Libraries have always been pro-family,” she said. “We let families decide what’s right for them. We don’t determine what every family reads, and we don’t want a vocal minority to determine that either.”
The book-banning movement has also created a new threat to librarians themselves.
“It’s heartbreaking to me to say to an LGBTQ student or a student of color, ‘You may not be safe working in a library,’” says Fontichiaro. “Nobody became a librarian because they like death threats. We just want to help people.”
“My neighbor shouldn’t be making decisions about what I can read.”
Debbie Mikula, director of the Michigan Library Association, has even heard about a prosecutor who is considering bringing criminal charges against a librarian who has refused to remove certain books.
“A library’s responsibility is to provide free access to all expressions of opinion,” she says. “No one should take that choice away from readers. We’re witnessing something that is unprecedented. My neighbor shouldn’t be making decisions about what I can read.”
The American Library Association (ALA) states: “The foundation of modern librarianship rests on an essential set of core values that define, inform, and guide our professional practice.” These values include access and intellectual freedom.
MI Right to Read is a grassroots coalition of concerned Michigan residents organized by the Michigan Library Association to fight censorship in libraries. The coalition opposes any attempts to ban books from Michigan libraries based on content subjectively deemed inappropriate. Its purpose is to educate the public and oppose any legislation that infringes upon First Amendment rights and intellectual freedom.
“Selecting materials for a public library using a professional process involving objective criteria is very different from removing material because the remover dislikes or is made uncomfortable by the content,” the organization says. “One is collection development; the other is censorship.”
MI Right to Read offers toolkits on its website to help fight censorship.
Community Resources
Librarians work in a wide variety of settings. There are public libraries like Portage Lake District Library, school libraries, university libraries, archival libraries and specialty libraries for law, medicine and various businesses.
In addition to providing books, videos, music and online resources, public libraries serve three vital community functions. They preserve the history and cultural heritage of their area, act as community centers for residents, and provide resources one would not normally expect from a library.
For example, Linde-Moriarty says that people have come to the library seeking help when their water has been turned off, they have lost a job or are facing homelessness. The library staff help them connect with community resources to address their problems.
“Emergency rooms triage for medical emergencies,” Linde-Moriarty said. “We triage for everything else. We have to have a robust skill set and knowledge across all staff members. The library is a hub of humanity. A librarian’s role is to help people make connections. We have our foot in a lot of different doors, work with a lot of partners. There’s a lot that goes on behind the scenes in a library.”
Preserving History and Cultural Heritage
Preserving cultural heritage is an important if little-known activity of librarians, Linde-Moriarty says.
“We are working to capture local history and personal narrative through recordings, videos, and podcasts. That’s very exciting. Capturing more than written narratives creates vibrant archives.”
The American Library Association notes that libraries help ensure an authentic record of knowledge created and accumulated by past generations.
“Libraries are rich repositories of historically and culturally significant collections, many of which are not available anywhere else in the world,” the ALA says on its website. “In a world without libraries, it would be difficult to advance research and human knowledge or preserve the world’s cumulative knowledge and heritage for future generations.”
Diversity is another issue facing librarians today.
“Diversity has fractured communities,” Linde-Moriarty observes. “The library is a community hub, welcoming and inclusive, a central gathering place for the community.”
But librarians are predominantly white women, Linde-Moriarty noted. So is most of the library staff.
“Who’s missing from the equation?,” Linde-Moriarty says. “We need to be broadening our perspective, not only in our stacks, but on our staff.”
Despite all the challenges, Linde-Moriarty would not have chosen any other career. Their dedication to battling censorship, to preserving our cultural heritage and to making the library an accessible, attractive, welcoming center of the community holds them right where they are, and they love it that way.
After paying conservative speaker, questions linger, answers are sparse
A week after Michigan Tech’s University Administration overruled a decision of the Undergraduate Student Government (USG) students are still asking questions, but answers from decision-makers are sparse.
Even University faculty and staff who agree that the decision had to be overruled have criticized the ‘punitive’ nature of USG’s ‘emergency meeting’ and dispute its ‘educational’ merit.
Following up on “Admin at MTU subverts student self-governance”
A week after Michigan Tech’s University Administration overruled a decision of the Undergraduate Student Government(USG), students are still asking questions, but answers from university decision-makers are sparse. Even university faculty and staff who agree that the decision had to be overruled have criticized the ‘punitive’ nature of USG’s ‘emergency meeting’ and dispute its educational merit.
Friday before last (Feb. 17), Michigan Tech administration issued a memorandum forcing the USG to immediately disburse funding to pay conservative speaker Brandon Tatum after the funding request failed to reach the two-thirds threshold a second time.
Campus has been quieter this past week compared to the frenzy of social media, petitions, and public comments the week prior, but student groups have continued working to make their voices heard.
Keweenaw Youth for Climate Action (KYCA), a ‘primarily student-based’ organization registered with the University, released a “Statement on the recent USG meetings and institutional failure” on their instagram account shortly after USG’s ‘emergency meeting’.
It is apparent that the administration themselves did not want to take responsibility of the situation. Instead they attempted to ‘teach’ Michigan Tech students that they should lay down both their morals and principles out of fear of being sued by a highly controversial organization. [...] The result was opening a public rift amongst members and constituents of USG, causing members of USG to lose faith in the institution and opening MTU’s marginalized community to the possibility of more bigotry.
Keweenaw Pride (KP), the University’s LGBTQIA+ and Straight Ally organization, delivered a letter to the USG Friday afternoon thanking representatives and staff for their “tremendous courage” in voting no on funding “a speaker with a history of transphobia, homophobia, and bigotry.”
The letter went on to state that “This vote has been a major success for our community at this university, despite being overturned by administration. We again thank you all for your actions and your willingness to listen to our stories and concerns, despite the emotional toll it may have placed on each of you.”
President of Michigan Tech’s TPUSA chapter Caleb Glenn did not respond to a request for comment at time of publication.
TPUSA at MTU posted on their Twitter account Monday evening (Feb. 20).
After the student government refused to fund our event, we fought back. The money will now be allocated by admin @michigantech Thank you @theofficertatum @charliekirk11 and everyone who helped us! Hope to see you at BE BRAVE with Brandon Tatum on March 21st 7pm Fisher 135 MTU 🇺🇸
Michigan Tech’s University Marketing and Communications (UMC) department provided the following comment in regard to whether or not the USG was obligated to fund all speakers hosted on campus.
Because USG is allocating fees charged to all students at a public institution of higher education, they cannot do so in contravention of the First Amendment. They can make many other decisions, though. For example, they could decide not to fund any speakers in the future or they could decide to cap spending on speakers at a set amount per group each year. The boundary conditions on their actions are those listed in Board Policy 7.6 from which their authority originates.
All attempts to arrange interviews with university employees and representatives were referred to UMC.
Copper Beacon talked to several concerned students involved with minority-centered organizations. Parts of their identities have been withheld out of consideration for their safety.
Andrew, a second year student, had this to say about the decision to override the USG.
“I understand that they don’t want to get hit with a lawsuit, however I feel there are things that are more important [...] like showing to your trans[gender] students that you care about their safety.”
A student who requested to be identified only as a first year, when asked if the university ‘considers student safety’ in making decisions stated, “They don’t particularly prioritize that, they more seem to prioritize not only the amount of students [...] but also the funding they get for the university.”
A student, who requested to be identified as a queer second year, when asked if in their experience Michigan Tech had been one of an inclusive campus emphatically stated, “They certainly pretend to be. [...] I feel like administration could definitely do a much better job at making sure that queer students are not harassed on campus.”
The student also offered an anecdote of earlier grievances they’d tried to rectify with the university. In the past, when messages from a student organization’s chat room leaked, they were shown to have hate speech directed at their friends.
“And I reported it to the university and there was nothing to be done besides like ‘it’s free speech, can’t do anything about it’,” they said.
Student voices were not alone in expressing concerns regarding the decision of University Administration.
Lindsey Wells, chair of the University Senate Committee for Promoting and Facilitating Equity and Understanding, offered an excerpt of a message sent to some faculty members.
We believe the forced emergency meeting to be punitive, not educational. It should have been obvious to all involved that the vote would not change, and we don’t agree with making students share their stories again, when it would have ultimately no impact on the result.
Copper Beacon secured a brief interview with Wallace Southerland, the Dean of Students, Wednesday evening as he was delivering pizza to USG’s weekly meeting.
Wallace Southerland, Michigan Tech’s Dean of Students. Photo by JuxtaPrax Sprague.
Speaking to the determination by the administration that USG had made a decision based on the “content” of the speaker, Southerland said, “I didn’t hear anything that would lead me to believe that an objective set of criteria was used.”
When asked what attempts were made to verify student claims made about Brandon Tatum, Southerland responded,
“I did a very brief, cursory search of the internet that night to see what I could find, because I wanted to be informed. I wanted to make sure that there wasn’t a clear record out there where the speaker incited violence, and from the very few clips that I looked at, I didn’t see anything that caused me to fear for student safety.”
In regard to a hypothetical scenario where a speaker advocated for violence against members of Michigan Tech’s campus, Southerland stated,
“We will always protect our student’s safety and if a speaker has done anything that results in students being harmed, there will be an investigation into that. We will refer to our campus police, we will refer to legal counsel, we will refer to state laws to find out if the speaker or the organization violated any laws or policies.”
The first meeting of Michigan Tech’s Board of Trustees (BOT) occurred Feb. 24. There was no mention of the incident with USG. After the meeting, Copper Beacon unsuccessfully attempted to solicit comment from two members of the Board of Trustees.
Admin at MTU subverts student self-governance
On Friday, a special meeting was convened at the request of University Administration to overturn the Undergraduate Student Government’s (USG) decision to deny a funding request of $3,500 to partially cover a $10,000 conservative speaker’s fee.
Michigan Tech Administration overrules student body decision, says not funding conservative speaker is a violation of free speech
On Friday, a special meeting was convened at the request of University Administration to overturn the Undergraduate Student Government’s (USG) decision to deny a funding request of $3,500 to partially cover a $10,000 conservative speaker’s fee.
USG had previously voted down the request at their Wednesday meeting, citing high student opposition to funding the speaker as well as safety concerns for minority students who were the target of bigoted rhetoric espoused by the speaker. University administration offered an ultimatum to USG to either change their decision or be overruled. USG, in blatant defiance of administration, voted down the funding request a second time.
The Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students issued a Memorandum directing USG to transfer the $3,500 immediately to the student organization hosting the speaker. The University Administration justified their actions, stating that USG had violated the speaker's first amendment rights in making their decision to not fund the event.
Leading up to this outcome was a week bustling with student activism, social media pressure, procedural controversy, and appeals to precedent across the University.
The week began relatively quietly, with students circulating a petition Monday afternoon on social media to “Tell USG @ MTU to vote no on funding TPUSA event”.
Information on Turning Point USA (TPUSA) from Influence Watch.
Students assembled in the audience on Wednesday for the Undergraduate Student Government meeting. Photo by Juxta Sprague.
The petition argued “TPUSA and its leaders have a history of spreading hate, disinformation, and dubious rhetoric at college campuses across the country.” and that “This money should be used to help other organizations on campus that do not have the same national funding as TPUSA.”
The petition encouraged students to contact their representatives and to show up to USG’s Wednesday meeting to voice their opposition to providing funding, and ultimately garnered 283 signatures.
Early Tuesday morning, a counter petition was circulated by the president of Michigan Tech’s student chapter for TPUSA, the host for conservative speaker Brandon Tatum set to visit the University in late March. The petition “BE BRAVE with Brandon Tatum Opportunity Fund Request Support” stated that they were hosting a “NON-PARTISAN event for freedom of speech where ALL STUDENTS on campus are welcome”.
The petition listed the anticipated breakdown in funding for the $10,000 event including grants from their parent organization, TPUSA (40%), student funding from USG (35%), and grants from The Leadership Institute (20%). The remaining 5% was to be covered by “funds from local business owners” (2%) and “fundraising via grassroots (can drive etc)” (3%).
The petition also stated that “There is a current push by a small group of people that do not want us to receive the funding in order to fulfill our contractual obligations to Brandon Tatum and his team.” implying that members of the student chapter had signed a legally binding document with the speaker prior to securing funding.
Late Tuesday evening, Brandon Tatum tweeted “The Crazy Leftist Diversity Inclusion Crowd at Michigan Technological Institute is trying to BLOCK a black man from speaking and I need your help!” before sharing the counter petition to his nearly 690,000 followers.
In a video Tatum published Wednesday morning titled “What They WON’T TELL YOU About the Michigan State Shooting”, he replaced his usual sales pitch for his merchandise store with a plea to his 2.2 million subscribers to sign the counter petition.
“We need more than 2,000 signatures to show that we ain’t putting up with that BS! Let’s come together, let’s fight back! I want to go to Michigan and show these leftists that there’s another perspective to this game and we ain’t playing with them.”
Within 36 hours, the counter petition had garnered well over 6,000 signatures. At time of publishing, the counter petition is still live and is nearing 9,000 signatures.
Michigan Tech’s website states that there are currently 7,009 undergraduate and graduate students attending the university.
Late Wednesday evening, Michigan Tech's USG gathered for their weekly meeting. The audience gallery was packed with over two-dozen students, in stark contrast to their typically quiet meetings. Eleven students delivered prepared public comments, one in support, and ten in opposition to the funding request.
Caleb Glenn, president of Michigan Tech’s TPUSA chapter, spoke first, “We are hosting a non-partisan event regarding free speech for all. All students are welcome to attend. […] We think that having Brandon Tatum on campus is going to elevate the level of free speech on campus, and we're going to get a lot of discourse, which is always good.”
The ten other speakers identified themselves largely as members of the queer community, environmentalists, or proxy spokespersons/representatives for other students who could not attend or wished to remain anonymous.
One student who identified himself as a trans man explained his experience on campus.
“I’ve been called homophobic slurs by my fellow students, and I’ve felt threatened at times,” he said.
In reference to one of Brandon Tatum’s videos, he said that “[Brandon Tatum] states that trans girls using locker rooms are creepy, weird, and stupid. […] and also suggested that gay athletes should keep quiet about their sexuality so that they don’t make their teammates uncomfortable.”
Kieran Rowan, co-president of Keweenaw Pride the LGBTQIA+ and Straight Ally student organization of Michigan Tech, began by citing the University’s diversity and inclusion statement to USG before contrasting it with comments made by Brandon Tatum.
“Brandon Tatum has repeatedly made remarks in the past that invalidate the identities of LGBTQIA individuals including that we are ‘abnormal’ and ‘on the wrong side of Christ.’ These types of comments are incredibly hurtful and directly opposed to that idea of a ‘mutual and respectful’ conversation. [...] We want to feel supported by the university and for that we don’t want to feel like our rights are opinions. We want to feel like our rights are human rights.”
Several staff members of the university also weighed in during the discussion.
Laura Putwen, Director of the office of Community Conduct, delivered a summary of a conversation that she had with Michigan Tech general counsel.
“While you all were discussing, I was on the phone with our general counsel. Funding a speaker is funding a speaker. The University as a public institution is not going to say ‘No, you can not come to this institution’ in terms of using our space. Now we might say you can’t be in a certain space, ‘you can go to this space but not this space’ so there are guidelines and limits we can do, but there are laws that we have to follow.”
Danielle Meirow, Assistant Director of Leadership and Involvement as well as an advisor to USG, delivered an official statement to the USG prepared by MTU Marketing and Communications. All attempts to contact staff at the University were redirected to a written copy of the same statement.
One of the most important and exciting things about being on a University campus is the opportunity to experience situations that encourage growth and stretch us out of our comfort zone. Speakers and events that express opinions and ideologies different from our own are an opportunity to learn, to seek understanding, and further develop our own views.
As an institution, Michigan Tech fully supports free speech, which includes protecting the ability of speakers to express what may be considered unpopular views on campus, as well as ensuring others are welcome to criticize and contest those views. However, those criticizing speech cannot interfere with the speaker's ability to share their ideas. Undergraduate Student Government through the SAF [Student Activity Fee] has precedent for funding speakers with a variety of views and has an obligation to follow that precedent. Not passing this opportunity fund request purely based on the expected content from the speaker would be hindering free speech on campus.
I am proud of everyone for being here to participate in a democratic process. I hope you continue doing so as we move through the rest of the semester. Student Leadership and Involvement is available and willing to assist with any conversations regarding additional events on campus.
Dean of Students and advisor to USG, Dr. Wallace Southerland, offered no comment during the vote proceedings.
After more than 50 minutes of discussion, the funding request failed, falling just short of the two-thirds majority requirement.
Despite the successful efforts of many students to lobby their representatives to vote against the funding request, the university quickly found itself mired in controversy. USG was forced to convene a special meeting by administrators Friday afternoon to “align [their] vote with state law, board policy, and university values.”
The meeting was publicly announced less than five hours beforehand and stated “no public comment will take place, though the public may attend if they wish to.”
The general counsel of Michigan Tech, Sarah Schulte, explained that USG could either change their vote to fully fund the $3,500 request or that the administration would overrule and provide the funding without their consent. Schulte stated that USG had made a decision “due to the viewpoint of the speaker” and as such was in “direct contravention to the first amendment.”
Many representatives expressed grave concerns about the secretive and undemocratic nature of the meeting, which disregarded the voices of the student body. Others advocated that it was USG’s duty to uphold precedent and approve the funding request as demanded by administration.
Ben Conlin delivers his remarks at Friday’s meeting. Sitting behind and to the right is Sarah Schulte, university general council. Photo by Juxta Sprague.
College of Computing representative Ben Conlin, a recent addition to the body, offered his comment to explain his vote.
“I’m brand new to USG, this is my [second] meeting so I kinda want to tell a little bit of my story and why I voted the way I did. [...] I’m a member of the Political Affairs committee and my current project is planning the candlelight vigil to honor the lives [lost in] the MSU shooting. I grew up in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the site of the recent Club Q shooting. [...] I held my best friend in my arms as they sobbed fearing the world that hunted people like them. I had a friend commit suicide because they were forced by family, church, and advisors to hide who they were, choosing death over the world they had been born into. [...] It feels like we have been told we cannot vote no, and I fear that I cannot vote yes, because my heart hurts too deeply for the community that is marginalized and threatened.”
Fourth year student representative Griffin Abbott, stated that, “At Wednesday’s meeting we had students, including representatives from the body of LGBTQIA at this university crying and begging us to consider their safety in this matter. [...] If we are to stay entirely content-neutral in all matters, how far does that go? We have seen students pointing out the lack of consideration for the humanity of trans and gay students. What other protected classes are we willing to allow speakers to come and spew their hatred about on this campus?”
Emily Ruf, treasurer of USG, who made the initial funding recommendation of $3,500 delivered a prepared statement explaining why she was changing her vote from yes to no.
“Forcing the USG body to overturn this decision goes against the will of this body and the desires of our constituents who are paying customers of this university. The primary argument for my vote on this matter is procedural consistency. [...] Administrators asking USG to revote on a decision essentially in secret, without public comment, against the will of their constituents is not consistent with our normal procedure. [...] Many student members of this community shared deeply personal stories in front of a nerve-wrackingly large group of people in hopes of swaying this body. They should not have had to undergo that highly stressful situation for it to mean absolutely nothing to that outcome. I am voting no on this motion because I believe the decision at last Wednesday’s meeting was final. I am urging members of this body to vote no on this motion.”
The vote to approve the funding request failed a second time. The Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs and Dean of Students issued a Memorandum directing USG to transfer the $3,500 immediately to the TPUSA student organization for them to pay Brandon Tatum.