In regard to the closing of USAB meetings to both the press and public, it is hard to conceive how any student is better served by closed meetings. And it is especially irresponsible to make this kind of decision without formulating specific guidelines to define the why and how of closing a particular meeting.

Part of being a student representative is ACCOUNTABILITY for the expression of opinions while ACTING AS A STUDENT REPRESENTATIVE. Closing meetings to allow for candid expressions of "individual ideas and opinions" evades the public scrutiny student reps should be subject to -- it comes with the territory.

Honesty, better preparation, and familiarization with the issues is usually a better answer to "misquotes," "misinterpretations," or "out of context opinions." It is too convenient to cite media "mistakes" for slips of the tongue made in public or for reporting the discreet actions and opinions or reps.

I fail to understand why USAB members cannot "collaborate candidly" in open meetings -- unless their private opinions and actions on student concerns differ from what is expressed by and to their constituents and the public, or are so unpopular, they wish to evade scrutiny.

I cannot help but feel that this is nothing more than a smokescreen to cover their dissatisfaction with the media -- i.e. the Collegian -- yet it also excludes other media and students who might be interested enough to attend. If USAB has a bone to pick with the Collegian for misquotes, it should not take it out on the students they purportedly serve.

In a large PUBLIC university that still has a substantially closed budget and too little student participation in decisions that affect their lives, we do not need more secrecy from student leaders.

I wholeheartedly disagree with the USG presidents's claim that the students will not be hurt in any way, since it eliminates the opportunity to OBSERVE FIRSTHAND one of the too few decision-making bodies that represents them.

Press releases are not an adequate substitute for direct observation of USAB meetings by the public and press -- it will allow USAB to convey what information it believes it important, instead of allowing students to observe and decide for themselves what is important. This decision invites abuse and sets a bad precedent -- it should be reconsidered.