OPINION: Failed Vote Signals End For UT-Tyler Athletics

This past November, over 1,100 UT-Tyler students turned out to vote on a question of whether to raise the mandatory athletics fee. . The student government (who officiated the election) saw a historic student turnout and in the end, students rejected the proposal.

According to election results, 621 students showed up to vote against the measure out of 1,106 student voters. Just compare this turnout with 660 students in 2016. In other words, November’s turnout was substantial. 

So why was this year’s turnout so high and what does it mean for the future of the athletics program? 

Unfortunately, the increased turnout marks the beginning of the end for UT-Tyler’s athletics program. For as long as there is an election awareness campaign that turns out the commuter student population, as there was in this election, then these students voters will always defeat a proposal to support the athletics fee. Therefore, it is only a matter of time before the athletics program dies for lack of funding. November's athletics fee defeat is the beginning of the end for UT-Tyler's athletics program.  

So, let’s go over this and see why this is true. 

Student Government Awareness Effort Drove Turnout

First, we should ask, “Why did this fee vote see such a large turnout?” The answer is because of the student government’s “get out the vote” efforts. 

Its effort to alert the student body of the upcoming vote is primarily responsible for the historic student turnout. Its student-wide emails, phone calls by some of its members and other election turnout efforts reached the entire student body, in one form or another, about the issue of student compulsory athletic funding. This was enough to turnout the vote. 

Therefore, as long as student government tells the student body about an upcoming athletics fee election, then the students will always turnout to vote against it. 

Most Students Oppose Compulsory Athletics Funding

The majority of student voters oppose compulsory student funding for athletics. These students do not see how intercollegiate athletics relates to their purpose of getting a college education. They do not see why they have to pay for sports entertainment in addition to their tuition and other fees. They do not see a necessary relationship between the two issues. Therefore, they vote against it. 

As far as I can remember (and I have been involved in student politics since 2015), students have always hated their mandatory participation in athletics funding. 

So why is this opposition showing up now? After all, previous athletics fee votes passed and students voters approved of fee hikes to the athletics fee. 

The answer is simple: this time students knew about the election in advance. The athletics program saw a significant defeat, despite the large turnout by athletics supporters, because unlike previous elections, somebody out there told every single student about the upcoming vote. This time, somebody out there (in this case, SGA) alerted them to their ability to participate. This is why these students showed up. Because this time, they knew about it.

Most Students Previously Unaware of Elections

I assert that athletics fee increases in the past succeeded because pretty much only the student athletes and their friends knew about these elections. This is why the turnouts at these times were so dismal (660 students or less). However, this past athletics fee vote had such large turnout (1,106 students) because finally, somebody informed them so that they can participate like the on-campus community. 

The athletic fee vote failed this time because the student population that was previously in the dark about their powers to participate in decision-making had the ability to represent themselves. This is why November's athletics fee vote failed, because the majority of student voters oppose the athletics fee and this time they had the information to know where to say so.

SGA's Election Awareness Campaign 

Therefore, as long as there is a mechanism in place to alert the normally disconnected student population about an athletics fee vote, then the athletics program will always lose the opportunity to gain new student funding. The opposition to athletics funding is the majority among student voters. With an election campaign to give them a heads-up, then an election will always result in the athletics program’s defeat. This is how democracy works. 

Without student funding, the athletics program will become unaffordable. Then, it will have to die, because the university will have to withdraw its funding and resort to another program to market its brand. Without student and institutional funding means the program will have to come to an end. These are the unfortunate economics that await the athletics program. 

The athletics program cannot survive without student funding, and right now, a majority of students are unwilling to give it. There is no way the athletics program can get around the student opposition to its program now. Therefore, the athletic program's failure to access new student funding thanks to the advent of disconnected student voters into student politics means this is the beginning of the end for UT-Tyler athletics as we know it. The program cannot survive without student funding and with the new student opposition standing in the way, there is no way for the program to attain it ever again.

Conclusion 

The athletic program without funding will die. As long as things there is an election mechanism in place and as long as the majority of students in the student population oppose athletic funding, then it is only a matter of time before the athletics program dies for lack of funding.  

Enjoyed this post? Never miss out on future posts by following me.

Twitter: @jhescock12

What do you think about my conclusion? Let me know in the comments below.

Feature Image by Nathan Rupert via Flickr