The Vaqueros Movement, a slate of courageous UTRGV students running on a platform of bringing transparency and true democracy to student government, is convincingly making the case to the student body for why they are the ones who can bring representation back to the Student Government Association (SGA).
Elections kick off April 1 and end April 4, 2024.
They come at a pivotal time in school history, its ten-year anniversary looming in 2025, the same year it’s set to kick off its controversial but much-anticipated football team.
A lot also hangs in the balance for the reason that student rights have been under attack on campus for a while, most recently in moves led or tacitly endorsed by current President, Odalys Saenz, who’s running for re-election.
The slate — with Noah Trstenjak for President, Mikaela Johnson for External VP and Alexis Uscanga for Internal VP at the top of the ticket — have been meeting with hundreds of their fellow classmates the last two weeks, discussing the everyday, bread-and-butter issues students regularly face.
They’re finding that most of them don’t know what SGA is, while those who have heard of it don’t hold it in high regard, expressing “frustration” and disappointment.
Listen how to make SGA known, take up “stack of bills,” N. Trstenjak:
This is the primary issue they’re tackling head-on, clearly identifying the problem, and providing realistic, articulable and testable proposals for how they’re going to fight for change, while calling out the ineptitude of the current SGA administration and why it needs to go.
Listen, “We Feel Left Behind When,” “The Opportunity for Change,” or “The Journey to Nowhere,” by N. Trstenjak:
In a “pre-recorded” debate held March 28, the Vaqueros Movement executive ticket held up a mirror to Saenz and her Vice President, Juana Jimenez, with whom she is running for re-election, pointing to the objective lack of legislation passed during their current term in office, exposing “the bubble” in which they live, detached from contact with everyday working students.
Listen, “This is the bubble that exists surrounding the current SGA…” by N. Trstenjak:
Odalys Saenz and her crew — Juana E. Jimenez for External VP and Gregorio Zuniga Internal VP — presented a bland, generic picture of student government that read as if it could’ve been generated by AI. It certainly sounded as if it was being read by bots recording scripted voice messages for health insurance companies, switching to Spanish in a “oprima dos, para Español” sort of vibe.
Saenz began her remarks by addressing UTRGV students as “Vaquerats” — “Vaquer@s”, a reference to the “trans friendly” rendering of “Vaqueros” and “Vaqueras”:
Saenz and co. are running on a platform of “Siempre Juntos,” “Always Together.” They’re taking a partisan political approach, deciding to focus on “gender” and “equity” and inclusion,” making the reinstatement of so-called “D.E.I.” programs as one of the central focuses of their campaign:
When called to account for their record by the Vaqueros Movement candidates, they deflected, made excuses, and crumbled like a house of cards.
They seriously argued for a brief moment that passing legislation through the student senate was not that much of an action in advocating for students, in order to excuse their record of passing only two pieces of legislation, which hitherto have not been signed by Saenz, thus in actuality have zero bills passed, versus the 50-60 passed annually by comparable universities, as referenced by Trstenjak:
Not to mention that it was Uscanga and Trstenjak, and others on the slate, who wrote, presented and passed those pieces of legislation in the student senate. They still await Saenz’ signature which she appears to be slow walking, so as not to give any kind of credit to her political rivals, even though she had to admit she “loved” and “looked forward” to it.
Listen, Saenz makes excuses for not signing any pieces of legislation, blames lack of knowledge of student government on pandemic and people being freshman or online students:
The exchange ended with the question of how SGA can “remain neutral”, which student media said was “a question that came from social media.” Trstenjak underlined his previous points about utilizing social media, and even feeding students like they did the other day, to hear their concerns. In reply Saenz said, “it goes beyond feeding students,” as if being fed was a small task.
Listen, N. Trstenjak on “neutrality”:
Saenz’ robotic, scripted response, poo pooing Trstenjak’s proposals to meet with and feed all kinds of students and organizations:
Having used the word “solidarity” in her reply, Trstenjak took her up on it by exposing how Saenz missed on big opportunity to show solidarity to fine arts students:
The Vice-Presidential Candidates had their say as well. Juana Jimenez, Saenz’ VP, admitted that some students have expressed not wanting to speak with them. Uscanga, who passed the Legislative Transparency Act, suggests community workshops and other new creative ways of gathering student opinion. Listen:
Listen, Uscanga and Gregorio Zuniga square off on question of legislation:
After another empty, Kamala-esque response from Odalys Saenz, as her side’s final statement, which I will not labor you to hear as there’s nothing valuable in it (believe me), Uscanga lays out one last time why UTRGV students should vote Vaqueros Movement, laying out the benefits of L.T. Act which was unanimously approved:
After Uscanga’s zinger, President Saenz had no choice but to acknowledge the merit and wisdom of Uscanga’s legislation, somebody whose articles of impeachment she tacitly supported in February.
Listen to Odalys Saenz admit Alexis Uscanga’s unanimously passed, Legislative Transparency Act, was step in the right direction. Still hasn’t signed it, says she will sign “this week”. Aver que:
Although some video footage of a candidate forum held March 21 has been released, student media has not even published the “produced” debate as of yet, raising curious questions about why they didn’t livestream it to the entire student body, unedited. Student media did stream the debate to a secret “test page nobody follows”, that is, except student media.
Listen to one of the student media facilitators, “Jesus,” explain secret “test page”:
Later in the debate, as shared above, the facilitators said they “received a question from social media,” suggesting some were watching the “test” stream after all, a privilege not afforded to the rest of student body.
Those facilitating the debate also said they would send the end-result to student government advisor, Courtnie Hernandez (who has demonstrated a bias towards Saenz and her ticket), after student media is finished “producing it.”
He says it will be ready by “whatever day” Hernandez “chooses to launch it.”
Listen to Jesus tell Kourtnie Hernandez she can launch debate whenever she decides:
Also given The Rider’s coverup of Alexis Uscanga’s unconstitutional impeachment, it would not be surprising if the best parts of the debate (holding the current student president and her administration to account) are edited out or cut short.
A friend who works for the university said he wouldn’t put it past student media and administration to not even air the debate at all, in any format. So, in case student media edits key parts out, this article — and first ever podcast piece I publish to my Substack — will serve to let you know what you missed.
And although I’m admittedly publishing specific clips, I did you a favor by cutting out all the white noise, long pauses, and boring explanations about how candidates can unmute their microphones, bringing you only the most essential, consequential and revealing segments of the exchanges.
Needless to say, I obtained exceptional access in sitting-in during this historic episode and brought you salient aspects of that experience. Despite whatever I post here, student media and SGA “advisors” should not have kept students from seeing the raw exchanges between the candidates by choosing not to air it live.
Not publishing it — especially the weekend before elections, and when they had 24 hours to produce it — is de facto assistance to Odalys Saenz and her ticket because the Vaqueros Movement executive ticket, led by Trstenjak, knocked it out of the park with grand slam sluggers, as shown here.
The debate therefore could’ve arguably been reported, and filed, under ‘sports.’
jonathansalinas@substack.com
Vaqueros Movement candidates hold SGA president accountable, make case for change, transparency