I really did not mean to start an argument or offend anyone - when I said donate
to those who organized the march I meant the groups that nationally organized
the march, not in our coalition. I thought that FMLA could not be returned any
money because they were given an alotted amount by SGA and for that reason had
to use all of it. If FMLA can recieve funds I think that they should recieve
the $180 verse any other organization for two reasons: they donated a
significant portion of money and because a basic focus of their agenda is
reproductive rights. I do not think enough thanks was given to FMLA for the
generous help and to Shannon who really pushed in SGA. They are the reason why
we all only had to spend $40. Regardless, they also have an account to hold
the money so that it can be used, whereas R.R.C. does not have a place to
deposit money (I will not hold it past May 14th because I do not want to be
responsible for it and I very well may not be returning to UVM in the fall).
As a final note, I think many of us used our own money to further this cause.
I did, but that cannot consitute a reason to split the money between the three
groups involved. We were in this fight not for a financial reward but to send
our voice to Washington. I find my money well spent in photocopies and gas
driving an hour to Morrisville to drop off the check to pay for the bus. This
is not a well organized paragraph, but I return to the fact that the people's
money will be well spent in a national organization moving for progress or in
the FMLA whose specific agenda includes the March and reproductive education
and rights. If people want to put stipulations on the money, fine, but I feel
this coalition has quickly become more concerned in recieving some part of the
money instead of just ensuring it is involved in supporting reproductive rights
nationwide. Honestly, I was utterly surprised to find such a heated argument
on this listserve concerning this $180.
The only reason I proposed the donation was because I mentioned it on the bus to
a couple people (from a couple different organizations, including members of
the ISO) who seemed to be in total agreement. I did not think there was so
much controversy and I apologize for introducing this issue on the listserve.
I am for resolving this in the most efficient and democratic way, but I do feel
that the ISO has the biggest voice in this argument just because of sheer
numbers. I hope that everyone is listened to because in the past I have felt
that dissenting views have been lost or ignored because the ISO has the
majority in the governing of the coalition (I am not placing blame on the ISO
for this; it was something that naturally occured without anyone's prompting
because the ISO has a strong position on most of the issues discussed in the
Hopefully other people can meet, but right now I cannot because of work, finals,
and family stuff. If other people have more time just let me know what the
consensus of the meeting is.
As a side note - there were so many messages I do not know if I missed this one,
but Charlotte when can I get that last check?
I am exhausted. Hopefully this can be read in a benevolent way even though I
know email is conducive to negative interpretations. I really hope it is
understood that I not tied to any organization and that my assessment of the
money is solely concerned with ensuring it is invested in the most ideal
situation or fund.
Quoting "Kristofer J. Jenson" <[log in to unmask]>:
> 1) If anyone wants to be removed from the list, please do not Email the
> list asking to be removed. You can consult the instructions in the Email
> first received when you were first put on the list. If you deleted it or
> cannot find it, you can Email myself ([log in to unmask]) or Shannon
> ([log in to unmask]) and we can remove you.
> 2) We should figure out a time to meet to discuss the leftover money, as well
> assess the march. Do we want to meet on Monday, briefly? Or maybe on the
> night before a reading day so it won't interfere with our exams? Perhaps
> weekend? A student (I can't remember exactly who) also made a short film
> the march that we should all get together to watch as well.
> 3) I'm afraid I don't quite understand why the ISO should be exluded from
> list of groups between which the funds would be split. The ISO has played a
> central role in organizing the coalition, the busses and outreach, as have
> Planned Parenthood, FMLA and the Women's Center. As a *democratic
> we all worked together for the same end: to get people on the bus to DC.
> As far as donations, the only donations made to the busses were from
> who dropped money into our water jug and from the SGA. The only
> body that contributed money to the busses was the SGA. Planned Parenthood,
> FMLA and the ISO did not do any actual donating as far as I understand it.
> Though members of each did pay from their own pockets for photocopying and
> whatnot. FMLA held the money from SGA, but it did not come out of their
> funds as I recall. ISO members payed the $40 for the bus just like everyone
> If the ISO had hijacked the coalition in any way, then I would agree. If it
> demanded that a resolution be passed or it would leave the coalition, that
> would be undemocratic. If it sent 10 unrelated Emails every day and refused
> let other organizations or individuals into the coalition, then it would be
> undeserving of credit. But it did none of these things. The Emails it sent
> were either announcements (as other groups have done), or wholly related to
> affairs. This is what a coalition is, and while we still have to decide
> to do with the funds, we cannot exclude any group that was critical to
> this coalition off the ground for purely political reasons. That is *not*
> No, this is not the ISO listserv; it is the RRC listserv, of which the ISO is
> highly active member. Planned Parenthood and the FMLA have used it
> as well. A coalition is designed so that groups may work together, and in
> working together we should also feel free to discuss what events the various
> organizations have planned.
> "We are now faced with the fact that tomorrow is today. We are confronted
> the fierce urgency of NOW. In this unfolding conundrum of life and history,
> there "is" such a thing as being too late. This is no time for apathy or
> complacency. THIS IS A TIME FOR VIGOROUS AND POSITIVE ACTION."
> -Martin Luther King, Jr.