The Undergraduate Student Government Senate did a major disservice to Penn State students when it allocated $1,500 to the Penn State College Republicans to pay for lodging during a conference in Virginia. Besides the fact that this large sum of money is only benefiting 35 students, 16 of the 25 members of senate are involved in College Republicans. This is not why Penn State students voted for these senators.

Senate is supposed to be a body representative of the 41,000 students at Penn State. Giving such a large amount of money to a group that only serves to help the group itself does not benefit students. This allocation of funds is the second biggest allocation this year second to the Martin Luther King Jr. Day of Service funding. The MLK Day of Service goes to about 3,000 students. Senate has the right to give as much money as it wants to any group it decides to fund, but its main responsibility is to provide money to organizations or groups that serve a larger number of students. Criticisms cannot be placed on the group for giving money to student groups, no matter which group, because it is senate's job to do so. The problem arises when senators appear to be advancing their own interests rather than the interests of the student population.

Senate is supposed to be a representative of Penn State students. Giving money to a group of students who will use this money to take a weekend trip only benefits that specific group.

What makes the senate action more disagreeable is the rhetoric some senators have spouted in the past to justify their actions on other issues. A November 29 Collegian article included a quote from Jason Covener, a USG senator, who opposed the Pride Week funding because he "was concerned that it was a social event being sponsored off campus for a select group of people." You can't get much more hypocritical than that.

Also, in light of senate's insistence on being "fiscally responsible," we find it odd that they were willing to shell out this much money for a small group to attend a conference that will benefit the participants and no one else.

This incident should serve as a warning to students. Penn Staters need to watch what their fellow students are doing for them in the USG Senate. They should keep those thoughts in the back of their minds when going to vote for a new crop of senators in March.

Penn State students' apathy towards voting has spawned a governmental body that acts for itself. Perhaps if students begin to pay attention to senate's actions, senators will begin to work for people other than themselves.