Last year’s measure A — not to be confused with this year’s measure about a GO-pass initiative — was passed with eighty-seven percent of the vote. Now the student body must live with its consequences. This measure, which was only recently ratified, changes the structure of joint special fees and means that the undergraduate population will be shouldering even more of the tax burden associated with paying those fees.

Unlike in previous elections where earning a majority of the total vote and at least fifteen percent of each electorate was enough to guarantee passage, special fees groups now have to earn at least fifty percent of both the graduate and undergraduate population. Since far fewer graduate students vote, this gives each graduate student vote more weight.

Between 2004 and 2007, had measure A been in effect, the following groups would have failed to get joint special fees despite earning an overall majority of voters support: Stanford Club Sports, Stanford News Readership, The Stanford Daily and ASSU Sunday Flicks.

More importantly, this measure changes the way groups approach special fees. Groups don’t undertake the process of getting special fees lightly. Special fees are often the main source of funding for a group and are always a vital part of a group’s budget. If a group applies for joint special fees and loses, it can be damaging. Recognizing this, Stanford Club Sports for the past few years has split into asking for joint special fees and undergraduate special fees separately. In 2005, Club Sports failed to get the grad student vote and lost a significant part of its budget.

This year, as a result of measure A, it is harder to pass joint special fees. The Stanford Daily and The Stanford News Readership Program, which have traditionally applied as joint special-fees groups, have switched to applying as undergraduate special-fee groups only. These groups are still asking for their full budgets — but from only the undergraduate population. This means a higher tax on the undergraduates.

The question that we must ask ourselves is, do these groups really only apply to undergraduates or do they serve the whole student body? This conundrum did not begin with measure A. Other groups that are undergraduate-only in funding are SCBN-TV, Stanford AXE Committee, LSJUMB-Stanford Band and Stanford Concert Network. It could be argued that all of these serve the larger Stanford community. Yet the undergraduate population is the only group funding these organizations.

It is entirely understandable that graduate students have bigger worries than funding the various groups on campus. It is reasonable to consider health care for dependents and low cost housing more important than LSJUMB or The Daily. However, many grad students actively participate in these groups or enjoy their services. Why should undergraduates be the only ones paying for them?

It is challenging to propose a solution for this problem. One of the great things about Stanford is that graduate students and undergrads work side-by-side in groups and enjoy many of the same services. Some groups, like The Band or The Daily, couldn’t control access to their services, even if they wanted to (which they currently don’t).

Yet, undergraduates must demand more. Otherwise, they will find themselves funding a still more disproportionate amount of groups that serve both classes of Stanford students. Maybe the entire structure of special fees needs to be reexamined. Maybe the Undergraduate Senate needs to add constitutional amendments affording undergraduates protection from over-taxation. At last resort, only if this situation can’t be resolved another way, these groups may consider denying services to grad students or charging a fee for grad members/users, thereby either forcing grad students to vote for groups during election or raise money in other ways. These measures, although assuredly drastic, would reduce the burden on the undergrad population.

When considering alternatives, it should be noted that no solution should make it even harder for the well-intentioned groups that serve the student body to get funding. Special fees money is critical to many groups’ survival. Don’t blame the groups for having to ask for money from certain populations. No group can afford to fail special fees.

The consequences of last year’s measure A are only beginning to be felt by the undergraduate population. However, it is part of a larger pattern of undergraduates paying for a disproportionate amount of student groups. This situation will not change until undergrads insist that the Undergraduate Senate fight to make the grad students share their part of the bill.