Benjamin Baxter / The Collegian: NO

ASI isn̢۪t just an outlet for residual high school overachievers to feel good about themselves while doing absolutely nothing. They do plenty. Most of the time, they decide to support some new referendum on the ballot.

This year, they support the proposed increase in the IRA fee, a line item of our overall student fees. This maneuver is worthy of real politicians, considering how disingenuous this IRA increase is.

Of the $70 extra the IRA should get, the IRA fund gets exactly $20. The rest — a full $50 — goes to athletics. ASI justifies the disparity this way: Bulldog athletics has paid a very low percentage of its operating costs, and it’s time to cough up a little extra.

Students have avoided this fee so far, for better or for worse, so voters might have been willing to swallow this bitter pill had the powers that be played straight.

They have not.

Rather than be billed as an athletics increase, this measure is labeled an IRA increase. If this is really the story ASI and others want to stick with, two things are plain: Not enough goes to the IRA fund and too much ends up in the hands of athletics.

The IRA fund deserves an increase not coupled with an athletics boost.

If athletics deserves an increase in funding, let it stand on its own in the ballot rather than tacking itself on to a universally worthwhile measure.

Though I would stand behind a genuine IRA increase, this fake version deserves to be defeated. Fresno State voters: Do not reward this political dishonesty.

Benjamin Baxter is The Collegian̢۪s Opinion staff columnist.

Mathew Gomes / The Collegian: YES

Oddly enough, I tend to agree with Benjamin on this issue — it feels like the administration that crafted this referendum is trying to pull one over on the students of Fresno State.

At its core, this is not a referendum on the current IRA fee — it is a referendum on the portion of our student fees that goes toward the athletic department.

Students deserve to vote on these issues separately, particularly when the university has demonstrated a particular brand of fiscal irresponsibility in the athletics department.

Forget the lawsuits — don’t we remember the misappropriated athletic funds, revealed to the public last year? It’s hard for me to have any sympathy for a department that was quietly spending money f rom donations not made in its name.

So what we̢۪ve been handed feels so underhanded, so subversive, that I want to vote against it just out of spite.

And yet, the academic programs at this school need the extra money that this will generate. The College of Arts and Humanities seems to have a particularly bitter struggle with its meager monetary allocation, with some programs only being sustained by the dedication of the faculty and students involved.

I will vote in favor of the increase for this reason — and so, depart from Benjamin — but the students and faculty need to demand a referendum on this referendum.

If the increase does not pass, I think it will be clear why: You should have let us vote on these issues separately.

Mathew Gomes is The Collegian̢۪s Opinion Editor.

Hector Cerda: NO

Anyone believing there are insufficient funds to support athletics are fighting on the wrong battlefield and should duke it out with the directors of athletics programs.

Since 2003, men’s and women’s athletics combined received an expense budget of more than $20 million. Campus budget books reveal some athletic programs overspending their budget — in 2003-04 by a total of $369,060 and the following year a total of $321,789. If these budgets were kept tighter, their funds should sufficiently maintain Title IX sports.

Director of athletics Thomas Boeh argues that other universities get more funding from students. His examples — 16 percent at CSU Long Beach and 73 percent at UC Davis — are misleading.

Consider this: CSU Long Beach resides in Los Angeles County where the poverty level is 16.7% and neighboring counties at 9.3 percent (Ventura) and 10.2 percent (Orange). The median household incomes, respectively, are $43,518, $59,379 and $58,605.

Similarly, UC Davis has lower poverty rates and higher median household incomes.Fresno State cannot compare when the poverty level in its surrounding counties are as follows: 19.8 percent (Fresno), 17.6 percent (Kings), 20.9 percent (Tulare) and 17.9 percent (Madera) with median household incomes at $36,930, $38,238 $34,809 and $37,881.

56 percent of our student body resides in Fresno County and 37.7 percent are from the Central Valley.

Our representatives need to be skeptical before they advise students to support increase in student fees and say they are looking out for students̢۪ best interest at the same time.

Hector Cerda is a senior majoring in liberal studies with minors in history and American Indian Studies.

Stephen Trembley: YES

We have been given an opportunity to save some superb academic programs and protect future students from paying even more for a lower quality athletic program. We need to vote for the Instructionally Related Activity fee increase.

With the increase, vital academic programs will continue receiving respectable funding levels and others will expand. Currently, 80 percent of applications are not funded and nearly all are necessary, career-oriented student programs. With just $20 each semester, we can add value to our degrees through a justified way of raising Fresno State’s stature and meet our needs as students.

Fresno State sports must stay in Division I-A to protect future generations from having to pay more per semester for a sub-par program. Students only pay one percent of the $23 million athletic budget. Steady funding improves the student-athlete experience and supplements the volatile $19 million raised annually from corporate sponsorships and contributions. This imperative $50 increase adds new women’s sports and provides a long-term, fiscally-responsible solution. We must support our student-athletes for the value they add to our degrees from their national spotlight and the academic support received from athletic donors.

We need to be smart about our money. We need to protect the integrity of our academic institution and sustain an athletic program competing on a national level with “Anyone, Anywhere, Anytime.â€Â The sticker shock is painful, but the alternative is even more painful.

Stephen Trembley is the Executive Vice President of ASI and Chair of the ASI Senate, which voted 7-1 in favor of the referendum.

Matthew Ortiz: NO

As California is poised to raise tuition another 10 percent, some 600 students will be turned away next fall and classes will be cut, the administration and your student leaders want to raise fees.

While it is true students currently pay only one percent of Athletics̢۪ current operating budget, and San Jose State and San Diego State students pay 21 and 35 percent, respectively, of their athletic operations, consider the following statistics.

The poverty levels of San Diego and Santa Clara Counties are 10.9 and 8.4 percent, respectively. Compare those to Fresno County: 19.8 percent, Tulare County: 20.9 percent and Kings County: 17.6 percent. In all, 82 percent of Fresno State students come from these three areas.

The per capita income of San Diego and Santa Clara Counties are $22,926 and $32,795, respectively. Compare those to Fresno County: $15,495, Tulare County: $14,006 and Kings County: $15, 848.

Fresno State is more sensitive to tuition increases than our sister campuses.

Supporters assert tuition increases by the state due later this summer will offset the disproportionate amount allocated to athletics. This absurd argument invites tuition hikes that are burdensome to those already hurt by the crippled housing market, slow job market and inevitable rising cost of gas.

The “New Californiaâ€Â the administration and your student leaders tout won’t be created by a bowl victory or NCCA tournament placement; it will be created by the student who has access to affordable education.

Vote for that right before it is taken away.

Matthew Ortiz is the ASI Senator for Student Affairs and Speaker Pro Tem, and was the only senator to vote against supporting the referendum.