Graham Spanier, "scholarly" professors and other defenders of "Cuntfest" and the like, have been arguing that the November event was an exercise of "free speech." How does "Cuntfest" constitute free speech, when student money totaling $9,519.64 was allocated for this event?

As part of a student's semester's bill, students are required to pay $38.00 per semester as part of the Student Activity Fee. If the fee is not paid, the student is not considered "registered." Students are forced to pay for pay for events like "Cuntfest." The allocation of nearly $10,000 of student money for "Cuntfest" amounts to "forced speech" as opposed to "free speech."

Are we to assume that any time an organization submits a budget to University Park Allocation Committee in the interest of obtaining SAF dollars and their request is declined, that the free speech rights of that organization have been violated? UPAC has a limited pool of student money. Is it too much to ask the committee to allocate student-generated resources in a manner that is fiscally responsible and toward events that display intellectual and educational merit?

Proponents of the SAF will advocate raising the fee such that additional events can be funded. Why Should Penn State continue to allocate student money towards events titled, "Cuntfest" and waste $175,000 on four "Distinguished Speakers" each year only to give short and often pointless talks? Danny Glover only spoke for 15 minutes! The Penn State/UPAC machine should consider allocating student money in a more fiscally responsible manner instead of asking for additional funds. The activity fee-hike proponents simply want to feed the fiscally irresponsible committee members in UPAC with more student money so that the 35 people with allocating power can misappropriate additional student money.

It is not unreasonable for Rep. John Lawless to demand that Penn State display a higher degree of accountability when it allocates student resources.