OC Election Interview Series: Senate Seat 3: Nick Schultz
This is the second in our series of online interviews with candidates for ASUO office. Nick Schultz is running for Senate Seat 3 (PFC), and today he takes a crack at our stock questions.
OC: What made you decide to run?
Schultz: I decided to run after speaking with many of my closest friends. Initially, I did not want to get involved with the ASUO. However, I have come to decide that the ASUO has failed in its mission to represent the students of the University of Oregon. The number of students on campus, who are greatly displeased with the job that the ASUO is doing, is absolutely unacceptable. Frankly, I did not see any other candidates enter this race who I felt were sincere in their efforts to reform the ASUO Senate. I simply could not stand idle and watch another meaningless election take place. I chose to run for ASUO Senate because I see a problem: the ASUO has lost touch with the overwhelming desires of the student body. This must change!
OC: What would you most like to accomplish, if elected?
Schultz: I would like to see the ASUO government fulfill its obligations to the student body. The problem is that many of the members feel superior to the student body, acting according to their own interpretations of right and wrong. I feel that they ought to be listening to the students and adhering to their demands. If elected, I think that my involvement would be the first of many steps in a direction towards open and hones government. In addition, I also have set forth an agenda, which I would like to accomplish if I were to be elected.
My primary concern would be to increase environmental protection and sustainability on campus. My Environmental Awareness Act would require that the ASUO and the school administration take several steps toward reducing emissions from campus vehicles. Secondly, I would pursue a serious overhaul of the Appropriations budgeting process. I would seek to replace the current system with a new “flexible budget plan” that does not make programs susceptible to funding cuts, which result from a lack of spending. All programs should have a basic funding amount. From there, additional funding can be appropriated according to their campus contributions. I am tired of witnessing program cuts; if a budget shortfall occurs, the ASUO ought to look at its personal financial problems rather than simply cutting from other programs.
OC: Are you part of a slate?
Schultz: No. I was asked by several executive platforms to join their slate, but I chose not to. If I am going to run under a platform of “Accountability,” then I need to ensure that the students understand that. If I were to run as a member of an executive slate, I would be contributing to the repetitive problems of “coalition governments.” I refuse to owe any potential election victory to an executive candidate. The voters have a choice to select me as their representative. If they do, I will not leave any doubt in their mind about who I will represent and remain accountable to.
OC: What makes you stand out as a candidate?
Schultz: I stand aside from other candidates in my firm resolve to change the way that the ASUO conducts business. Most of the candidates in this election are advocating a “Campaign for Change,” which seeks to make the ASUO more accountable to the student body. However, most of this talk does not transcend into action. I offer a defined plan of action that will reform the budgeting process while pursuing a progressive environmental agenda. More importantly, I am retaining the personal connection that I feel so many students have felt was lost. Lastly, I bring a new perspective to the ASUO. I have real life experience, through my involvement in clubs and my work with the Recycling Program on campus. In addition, my experience with finance is derived from my business minor focus. In the end, I enter the 2007 ASUO election with the necessary outside experience that will enable me to succeed in significant reform of the ASUO. I am a candidate with experience in the methods that I am proposing in my Senate race, but at the same time I enter this race as an outsider to student government.
OC: You are running for a PFC Senate seat. First, are you crazy? Second, what can be done about PFC?
Schultz: First of all, I would have to admit that I am crazy. Secondly, I am crazy enough to believe that the PFC can and will change. As I mentioned earlier, there are numerous problems with the PFC. For example, their entire methods of operation are ambiguous and seemingly secretive to the student body. However, this problem requires a unique form of solution. I feel that the entire process is completely filled with financial pitfalls. Most on-campus organizations ask for a budget that exceeds their needs and when this happens, they spend the money on wasteful expenditures. This is derived from the fear that they will have their funding cut for failing to use the entire budget. This very concept is bogus!
The PFC reviews the annual budget proposals based on a “strict budget system.” In this situation, each club is allotted a certain amount of money to spend and they typically do, because failure to do so will result in cuts from their program. The PFC needs to convert to a “flexible budget system” that does not measure financial success on expenditures but on student involvement. What I am proposing is that the PFC allots every program, based on the number of students involved, a certain amount of funding proportionate to their needs. Therefore, surplus budgets can be acquired and distributed to other programs in need, or returned to the student body.
OC: What do you see as the most pressing problems with the ASUO?
Schultz: The ASUO has five major problems that are resulting in a complete deterioration of student government. First and foremost, the ASUO fails to represent the student body’s interests and desires. Most students feel that the ASUO is not a significant part of their education, but this is ridiculous since the student body is paying over $200 per term to the ASUO. Secondly, the ASUO is funding numerous programs that have significant financial problems. For example, the Recreation Center is being bailed out every year, and yet the ASUO has not imposed any punishment for consistent financial irresponsibility. Thirdly, the process of appropriating the annual budget is seriously biased towards the athletic department, which fails to give adequate support to campus programs. The criteria for appropriating the budget must be re-evaluated. Fourthly, the ASUO lacks a defined process that is transparent to outside observers. Communication is necessary! Lastly, the ASUO has failed to address the significant environmental issues on campus and doing so has impaired the University of Oregon’s long term potential for sustainability. Unless these problems are corrected, our university could face significant disaster.
OC: In this section we ask candidates to pick one from each of the following pairs, and provide a brief justification for their choice.
OC: Budweiser/Labatts
Schultz: I have got to go with Budweiser on this one. The only reason that I choose Budweiser is because anyone who watches the Super Bowl must love their commercials. The commercial with the Zebra as the referee was hilarious!
OC: Elvis/The Beatles
Schultz: Without a doubt, I must support the Beatles. They opened the door for British bands in America. Without them, we could have never experienced some of the great 80’s rock bands, like Def Leopard.
OC: Fried Rice/Chow Mein
Schultz: I prefer chow mein due to the tasty pan fried noodles and fresh vegetables.
OC: Football/Basketball
Schultz: Basketball is more fun to watch, due to its quick pace and prime time antics. However, nothing compares to the feeling of playing football with your pals in the late fall.
OC: Sunni/Shia
Schultz: I think that any form of religious factionalism is unfortunate. This debate reminds me of my personal experiences with Christianity. Any time that a religion becomes a matter of politics, followers begin to lose the messages that were professed. I hope for the sake of all Muslims that they may continue to strive towards tolerance and focus their attention on adherence to Muhammad’s message.
OC: Whiskey and Coke/Rum and Coke
Schultz: I don’t drink either, but if I had to choose then I suppose that I would go with Whiskey and Coke. No particular reason why.
OC: Beerpong/Flipcup
Schultz: Even though I don’t play either, I would have to say beerpong because I have heard some great stories from my buddy Travis.
OC: Hemingway/Fitzgerald
Schultz: I have to pick Hemingway due to his exciting life! The man traveled across the world and wrote one of the most amazing novels I have ever read: War and Peace. Besides, Fitzgerald is a little to wordy in his writing. I really prefer Hemingway’s aggressive style.
OC: Thanks for agreeing to this interview.
Schultz: Thank you very much for giving me the opportunity to share my message with the student body. If anyone would like to learn more, then please visit my campaign website, at: http://www.myspace.com/nickschultz4asuo (no membership required).
[…] Day in today’s paper is damn funny and worth reading if you’re anyone but ‘Nick Schultz’ or ‘Evan’, if only for the fact that he managed to slip a potato joke in past the […]
I’m closing comments on this thread, because, seriously, this should be about berating a sissy over his failure to drink like a champ, not about…whatever you people are on about jeebus.
To clarify the Dems and Republican thing…the offices are funded by the ASUO. Even though the program does run on a budget of mixed funding (like many campus programs) it does receive the from the ASUO. The EMU offices enable the groups to coordinate voting efforts as well as allow every student easy access to the clubs. My point is that every student has the opportunity to access these clubs and, in many instances, these clubs make significant contributions to campus life and diversity.
Ok…thanks for doing my work for me. According to you, ” they [college dems and republicans] have offices in the EMU, which is funded by the I-fee.” This is my point exactly: they are funded by the ASUO. Thus, we all benefit from their work on campus and should all pay the fee. I understand that you disagree, but this is my opinion.
Secondly, you have miunderstood my point. Every campus program should receive “x” amount of funding, which the PFC will determine based upon the club’s needs and cotributions. Each club should then attempt to manage its expenditures, so as to avoid overspending the budget. Any portion of their budget which is not used should be applied to other clubs in need, via a “rainy day fund.” Clubs that do not spend all of their allotted budget should not receive decreased funding, in the following years, due to a failure to spend the total amount allotted. Moreover, programs that consistently exceed their budget (i.e. the Rec Center) who the PFC feels are being adequately funded should be met with an aggressive stance. If a program fails to follow the PFC budgeting guidelines, then I would say that the program can find its own source of funding (likely to be on a per use basis) outside of the ASUO. Thus, programs are held accountable to their budget and are expected to appeal through the ASUO. Lastly, it is important to distinguish between fiscal responsibility and opportunity. The ASUO has an obligation to provide certain funding to campus programs. At the same times, these programs should seek external funding to cover their desired budget totals, if they feel that the PFC allotted budget does not meet their desires. Does that clarify things a bit? Like I said, I am not swaying on these issues, but the wording may be slightly ambiguous. sorry
Don’t waste your time, Nick. I am 100% positive that the College Dems and College Rs recieve no incidental fee funding. They have offices in the EMU, which is funded by the I-fee, but they do not go in front of PFC for a budget.
Second, I am confused by your platform. You say in point 3 that you want to “Act more aggressively towards fiscal irresponsibility (sanctions),” and yet further down, you say, “programs are punished if they fail to spend all of their appropriated budget. Why is this? A program that does not exceed its offered budget should be commended”. You’re swaying on your issues, Nick. What kind of sanctions are you referring to then, if you don’t support decreasing groups’ budgets if they don’t spend it all? Defunding? Derecognition?
My personal platform embraces the idea that the ASUO should reassert a sense of fiscal responsibility in its practices. I don’t believe that cutting program funding is necessary, if we prioritize our expenditures. Here is what I propose:
1) Favor programs that provide students with work-study jobs
2) Create a fiscal benchmarking system that holds programs accountable for maintaining a balanced budget.
3) Act more aggressively towards fiscal irresponsibility (sanctions)
4) Advocate for audits of the LTD and the Rec Center in order to understand how many students are really using these facilities.
5) Eliminate student funding for services that the university should be funding (example–> the Career Center).
In the end, programs are punished if they fail to spend all of their appropriated budget. Why is this? A program that does not exceed its offered budget should be commended. Therefore, I propose extending the budgeting system to a 2 year interval. Then, the PFC wouldhave an adequate amount of time to assess a program’s expenditures. Programs that consistently go over budget, such as the Rec Center, cannot be bailed out on every occasion. Why would we want to reward fiscal irresponsibility. The major problem with the PFC is an attitude adjustment. I hope that helps. If you need further clarification, just ask.
Nick, how would you go about resolving the waste and reduce the i-fee?
“I think that there is significant fiscal waste in the ASUO allocation process which, if resolved, would stabilize the incidental fee amount.”
How would you do this?
First of all, I believe that the College Dems and Republicans do receive compensation from the ASUO. I will investigate this further and report back to you “A Student.” Secondly, I understand that the CURRENT proposal would require a mandatory Rec Center Fee. I am NOT proposing the current proposal. Under my plan, the Rec Center fee would be optional.
Sorry, that was supposed to be “any”. I was distracted by Wisconsin loosing and my bracket getting completley destroyed.
Neither the College Dems nor the College Rs recieve and I-fee money. Also, the new fee for the Rec Center wouldn’t be optional, it would be mandatory as well.
First of all, thank you “wow” for asking a question that I feel is appropriate. I will be more than willing to share my opinion with you. I feel that the Incidental Fee is undergoing an exponential growth that is placing a burden on students. I think that there is significant fiscal waste in the ASUO allocation process which, if resolved, would stabilize the incidental fee amount. The Rec Center is a significant problem. I have personally never used the Rec Center. Therefore, I am in favor of a “student audit.” I personally favor making the Rec Center a seperate, optional fee for students that actually use it. This will, of course, relieve the burden on students such as yourself. As for part time students, I am forced to state that part time students should still pay the full fee. My reasoning is that I do not participate in College Democrats or Republicans. Yet, I benefit from their on campus activities. I merely have the choice to join the club. I feel that all students should pay the same amount towards clubs since we all benefit. However, I do feel that the Incidental Fee is higher than it should be and will definetely be reduced. Although you may not agree with my opinion, I thank you for the thoughtful question and the respect that you demonstrated.
ok guys I think we should give Nick a fair chance. Because I am close to several campaigns–hamilton’s nidermeyar’s and rosenburg’s–who by the way are all being called rascist in the union hallways, I can understand a politically motivated attack. Nick should be judged on the issues, the rest is fairly irrelevant.
Nick
What do you think about the benchmark process? What do you think about the exponential growth of the inicdental fee? And, what do you think about people’s access to college (eg part time students) who take 8 credits but have to pay the ENTIRE incidental fee? My cousin who attended here for two terms had to drop out. he was working two jobs to pay for college and taking two classes. The class bill for two terms totaled $2400, the fee charges totaled $1000 EVEN THOUGH he only wasj a part time student and never had to time to use the rec center!! He had to drop out…too fucking expensive. the fees are a huge rip off adn they affect average students’ accessibility
Allow me to state several things. First, your accusations have been delivered in a deliberate manner to derail my campaign. Therefore, I am forced to believe that your decision to accuse me of such attrocities are politically motivated. Thus, you are the problem with politics. Secondly, I do not have “everything to lose.” I did encourage you to get others to vote, and I stand by that initiative. I will not seek punishment against you, because you have a right to express your viewpoint. However, I remeind you that the ASUO election packet states that “sabotage of campaigns willnot be tolerated.” Therefore, be careful of what you say against me. If I hear anything more of these false accusations, attempting to publicly disgrace me, then I will seek justice. Say what you will and think what you will…but any public campaign against me will result in repurcussions. Thirdly, I have the utmost respect for women and I only apologize that they are being used as a political ploy. YOU should be ashamed. Fourth, these accusations are false, thus I will never apologize to Evan. By the way “Eric Fuller,” there is an inherent flaw in your story. You stated that you were “the other campus recycling employee exiting Susan Campbell Hall.” How is it that Evan knows so much if he was never there? More importantly, it is clear that only person claiming to be there “Eric Fuller” was you. Thus, you are the only “credible” source. Fifth, I do respect and represent campus recycling. Therefore, I would appreciate if your politically motivated group did not try to bring down people who represent campus recycling. Both of you should be ashamed. I do not apologize for this false statement. In the end, you are partially right “Eric Fuller.” What you are doing is a “bold faced lie!” I merely ask for a fair election. I do encourage you to participate, and get others to vote. However, negative campaigning will not be tolerated by the university. I am sorry for your complaints, but I cannot force myself to take a fall for something that I am not guilty of. By the way, DO NOT question my respect for women. Perhaps, I will hve my girlfriend testify on my behalf.
Because I think aspiring public figures need to be held accountable for there actions I’ll confess to being the other campus recycling employee exiting Susan Campbell hall when nick shultz said
Nick, what I am telling you is information that was passed to me from a credible source. I worked at Campus Recycling too, and I know people who work there. Obviously, I’ve struck a nerve somehow, which means I’m right. Quit trying to cover your ass, Nick. I know the truth.
Personally, I don’t have problems with women, but I wish I could say the same about you. And if you don’t have problems with women, and just wanted to be funny and impress your coworkers, well, then I think you have a messed-up sense of humor and skewed priorities.
Do you really care about campus recycling? Your political actions (involving the new biodiesel vans) would suggest that you do, but your blatant disrespect for the integrity of the organization suggests otherwise. When you are out on route on campus, you are a representative of campus recycling. When you shout obscenities at strangers for laughs, you represent campus recycling. I don’t think you have any idea how much you could’ve destroyed that benevolent organizations credibility with that one act.
Also, don’t threaten me with punishment. For one, you can’t, because what I’m saying is true, and I have sources who would be willing to testify in my defense. Second, I have nothing to lose. You’re a naive aspiring politician with everything to lose. And thanks for the tip on encouraging others to vote. I’ll encourage them to vote…against you. You’re a power-hungry Tracy Flick, and you represent everything that is wrong with politics.
yeah…the blog has gotten off topic. Anyone who would like to discuss issues, rather than personal vices, can contact me at my campaign site: http://www.myspace.com/nickschultz4asuo. Best of luck to all of you in the upcoming election season. I only hope that you encourage others to vote.
I find that politics have become too hardened by personal agendas. Why can’t a representative of the people have some passion (i.e. emotion) in what he says? Acting cold may be a good political move, but I am not a politician. I am an average student trying to make a difference…I am human and I won’t deny it. As for my performance on the Senate floor, we will see if I get elected first. If I do, then I will allow my progress and successes to seak for itself.
Seriously?!? what the heck os going on on this blog????
Wow this guy’s hella emotional. he doesn’t stand a chance on the senate floor if this is how he reacts. Some advice: get your game face on. It’s politics. Your statements are dripping with emotion and I can’t even hear your tone or read your face!!!
I apologize “Timothy” for the skewed course of this interview. I had hoped it would have amounted to more than personal insults. I will no longer be addressing concerns raised on this page, but I must take such outrageous accusations with a level of seriousness.
One last thing…If you do have some sort of personal grievance with me then I suggest that you address this issue, with me, in person. Your course of action (attempted public humiliation) borders conduct that may be punishable. I would not be opposed to a personal meeting at the time and location of your choice to address these accusations. However, for your own sake, you may respond with location and time info. at my personal address: [email protected].
Kids, don’t make me turn this blog around.
By the way, I was raised by a single mother, after my father left. I HIGHLY RESENT THE COMMENTS ABOUT WOMEN THAT YOU JUST MADE.
First of all, I would have to say that the words that are being siad, on your part, are a complete and utter lie for many reasons. Your assumptions of my character are flawed, as well as your logic. I do not intend to insult your personal ideology, but merely your desire for vicious attacks. Secondly, if what you are saying is true, then why would you happen to know where I am at all times? Chances are that you are listening to the words of others, if not manifesting these notions in your own mind. If you do continue to follow me, at my job, then I will be forced to pursue an alternative course of action with the authorities. For the record, your accusations are a lie and any pursuit of demeaning conduct in the course of this election will result in serious consequences on your behalf.
I don’t know about these others guys, but I certainly lack sophistication and class, and probably intelligence too. However, I don’t take your attacks on my character too seriously, as you are even less sophisticated than I am. You want to talk about personal attacks? I’ve got one for you: how “classy” is it to, while working, exit a building such as Susan Campbell Hall and shout something like “ALL WOMEN SUCK!!” as you close the door? I’d say that certainly lacks sophistication, wouldn’t you, Nick?
Here come Nick’s true colors!
Like I said, personal insults mean a lack of sophistication and intelligence, as well as class. Too bad there won’t be a victory for hard-core conservative minded people, such as your self. Perhaps you could find some fascist to run for PFC and cut programs from multi-cultural groups.
I hate to correct your grmerr here “real,” but I think you meant “cant.”
*Thanks, ladies and gents, I’ll be here all week.
I think Nick is a great righter and I can’t waite for him to represent me.
I’m voting for the other guy.
Sorry.
“certain amount of funding proportionate to their needs.”
Cool man, good thing Marx is represented.
I respect your right to not vote for me and i respect your honesty. However, you should not resort to personal insults to make your points. That demonstrates a lack of sophistication and intelligence, as well as class.
Nick, even though I no longer go to the U of O, I just want you to know that I would never, ever vote for you. Ever.
Well…perhaps you are right. And besides, what better way to conquer my “fear,” as you described it, than by having some fun on St. Patty’s Day.
Man, trauma in your early life is the BEST reason to drink.
You’ve gotta conquer your fear, man! Get on that horse, ride it all the way to regrettable decisions town!
SQUARE!
PS: The deal with Tony Danza is that he sucks.
Ok…that was pretty funny. But as I was saying, I have no problem with drinking. I just don’t drink due to some trauma in my early life. And what was the deal with Tony Danza?
If your aunt had died from, say, suicide by gun would you avoid gun ownership? Nay! You gotta get right back up on that horse, show it who’s boss! HINT: It ain’t Tony Danza!
I really don’t mind your jokes…but alcoholism a disease. And it cerainly has more harmful effects than death by boredom.
boredom is the price of firewatch.
That’s some classic “2:25 am” stuff right there, t.
Boredom is the price of eternal vigilance.
My aunt passed away due to being boring. What’s your point? Sometimes I continue to remain boring.
In this case, the OC would still receive a higher budget than the Insurgent.
The Insurgent actually receives a higher budget than the OC, it was just an example.
First of all…a couple points to make.
1) Sorry…I meant “A farewell to arms” by Ernest Hemingway. War and Peace is good, but I like the genre that Hemingway rights.
2) Tolstoy is a genius! Couldn’t agree more.
3) “War: What is it good for?” was also a Vietnam era song lyric. Therefore, for the sake of serious thought, I did not include that detail.
4) The amount of output by student organizations will receive first priority in funding…but the level of student involvement must also be taken into account. In this case, the OC would still receive a higher budget than the Insurgent.
5) It is a shame that I don’t drink, but since my aunt passed away due to alcoholism, I find other ways to occupy my time.
Thanks guys for the interview. If you have any questions, visit my webpage or write an e-mail.
Thank goodness for Tolstoy’s secretary.
Also, in the name of historical accuracy, the original title was “War: What Is It Good For?”
Oh, and something I didn’t notice at first: Dude, umm… War and Peace? Yeah, Tolstoy. Russian. Genius. Might have heard of him. This is Hemingway.
Seems okay, save this:
That seems to imply that the volume of students involved in production is more important than the number of students serviced by output. For instance: There are probably more staffers at the Insurgent than at the OC, but they print half as many issues a year, have less than half the circulation, and don’t have a website. I think he’s headed in the right direction, but that needs to be clarified.
Also: