The U.S. House of Representatives defeated an appropriations bill amendment last night that would have regulated college appropriations to some student groups at all colleges and universities that receive federal funding.
Proposed by Rep. Gerald Solomon, the New York republican who is chairman of the House Rules Committee, the amendment prohibited federal funding to colleges and universities that subsidize political organizations or political groups through mandatory student fees.
The amendment, which lost 263 to 161, sought to stop all direct financial support for campus groups that promote political advocacy, Solomon's Press Aid Bill Teator said.
Teator defined political advocacy groups as groups that endorse, make contributions, support or oppose either legislation or political candidates.
Ted Whitsell, an aide to Solomon, said students should be able to decide whether or not they want to pay for lobbying or political organizations.
Director of Student Activities Tim Moore said he could not determine how much the amendment would have affected Dartmouth.
"There's some question to how this legislation would be interpreted and implemented if passed," Moore said.
Government Professor Richard Winters said the amendment might have affected campus life by restricting the actions oforganizations.
If the ideas of the amendment are implemented, "I think that the heads of these organizations will be somewhat more cautious in their actions," he said before the vote.
"They might be afraid they will be denied funding if they are too aggressive in advancing their distinct organizational point of view," he added.
Campus attention to the amendment was aroused by an electronic-mail message that circulated recently through the College urging students to protest the measure.
Michael New '97, a member of the Conservative Union at Dartmouth said he supported the amendment.
"By and large I don't think people should have to pay for things that they don't believe in," New said.
Young Democrats co-President Nora Freeman '97 said the money her organization receives from the College goes toward funding debates and speakers. Personal funds are used for endorsing political candidates.
But Freeman said she did not support the amendment because she does not support anything that would inhibit political activism.
One of the main organizations that would have been significantly affected by the amendment are public interest research groups. PIRG's are statewide, student directed, public interest organizations that traditionally focus on the environment, consumer production, homelessness and government reform, U.S. PIRG field staffer Margie Alt said.
"We believed it was just a gag rule for students wanting to speak out on student issues," Alt said.
Moore said Dartmouth is not affected by any PIRG groups.
Each Dartmouth student pays $35 per term in mandatory student activities fees, Moore said, but those fees are generally not used to help organizations lobby for causes.
"The funding mechanisms differ on different campuses, but the essential principle is that students end up funding their campus [political interest research groups], usually without realizing it," according to a summary explanation of the amendment distributed by Solomon's office.
Several coalitions nation-wide have been working to protest the amendment, said Rick Taketa, campaign director for the Free the Planet Campaign.
There was a "tremendous amount of activism to protest this," he said.
House Minority Whip David Bonior, a democrat from Michigan, expressed his views against the amendment during House floor debate last night.
"I encourage each and every one of my colleagues to vote against this. Allow [students] to flourish in the historic context by which they've been made great throughout the centuries," Bonoir said.
But Teator said the amendment was supported by some college political groups.
"College Republicans would be affected by this and they've endorsed it," Teator said.
Teator said indirect support from colleges, such as permitting political advocacy groups to use campus facilities, would not have been prohibited by the amendment.
Solomon's amendment also "provides an exemption for all officials of the university, the recognized student government and official student newspaper on campus," according to Solomon's summary explanation.
An institution that defied the amendment would have been ineligible to receive "any federal monies that go directly from the Department of Education to the college or university such as Pell Grants," according to a document from Solomon's office.
The amendment supported a positive check-off system, which would enable students to voluntarily decide whether or not they wanted to have their money go toward organizations, rather than the negative check-off system, in which students can only say if they do not want their money to go toward organizations, Whitsell said.
Teator said groups such as PIRG do not like positive check-off systems, because they acquire less money.
PIRG last year received $800,000 from the state of New York in mandatory student fees, according to a document provided by Solomon's office.
Solomon dubbed his amendment the "Students' Rights Amendment" which modified the Labor/Health and Human Services/Education Appropriations Bill.
-- Additional reporting by News Editor Siobhan Gorman.
