Any controversial decision in history has been defined by its outcome. On March 17, the S&A Committee convened to discuss budget changes to various student organizations and programs after the committee’s funding allocation was cut for the upcoming 2026-2029 FY term. After deliberations, the group sent its finalized reports to the ASCWU Student Government and Joel Klucking, the Senior VP of Finance and Administration. When programs like The Observer and PULSE learned that their budgets would be deeply cut, staff, the public and even alumni opposition erupted, sending a clear message to the committee that its controversial decision would not be passed without an outcry. 

Before I begin, I would like to say that I am a recent alumnus of CWU (Class of 2024) and worked at The Observer for around two years as a photographer before becoming the director of photography at PULSE Magazine for the last two quarters of my college career. I joined the staff to build on my previous work as a photographer overseas and strived to connect with the local community. In the aftermath of my years at The Observer and PULSE, I was able to create a portfolio: a collection of the photographs and stories I’d produced. It’s important to also note that while The Observer and PULSE were classes and I was in a paid position, I never declared a communication or journalism major or minor. Joining these two student media outlets never directly added to any mandatory course credit in my major (Film Production) but rather provided me the opportunity to create original works that would eventually define my legacy at CWU. That said, these experiences were integral and indispensable to my education.

Let us dive deeper into understanding the committee’s controversial decisions by figuring out how much was cut to both PULSE and The Observer, why these amounts are unforgivable and why we are going to lose everything. 

In order to understand the amount cut, let us express the final budgetary allotment as a percentage. To calculate this, a formula can be used. Utilizing one from CueMath.com to find the percentage decrease, the website detailed the following formula: 

We must use two different values to deduce the percentage decrease. In this case, the “Old Value” would be known as an organization’s requested amount, while the “New Value” would be the S&A Committee’s recommended amount. The “Percentage Decrease” highlights the total percentage cut from the requested amount. 

Under the S&A’s Annual Financial Reports Webpage, the committee links PDFs detailing its budget breakdowns for a three- to four-year period. On each of the first pages from last term’s breakdown and the new term’s breakdown, the “total base funding allocation” amount is shown. On FY’s 2022-2025 base funding allocation, the amount was $7,450,000. In this most recent FY’s 2026-2029 allocation, the amount was $5,673,244.92. Using Equation (1) (seen below), the overall percentage decrease for the S&A Fee Committee’s total base funding allocation was 23.85%. 

Under the “FY26 Proposed S&A Allocation” section,  the PDF showcases three different columns: the requesting area, the requested amount by the specified organization and the recommended amount, a sum that the S&A Committee casts as the finalized amount that will go to the designated group. Under PULSE’s section, the publication requested an initial $28,412 for funding the magazine in the 2026-2029 term. The committee concluded that $2,000 would suffice. Here is the calculation to determine PULSE’s percentage cut:

Thus we see that PULSE took an astounding 92.3% cut, nearly four times the overall budget cut. 

Next, for The Observer. After plugging in the new numbers, here the results below of what S&A cut from The Observer’s budget:

The Observer stands at a shocking 98.05% cut. A publication which is celebrating its 110th anniversary at CWU was impacted by a near total 98.05% cut. Let that sink in. 

In regards to these two student media outlets, the so-called budgeting process looks more like the Hunger Games. Why is a budgeting committee, like a Roman emperor, deciding who survives and who doesn’t by the turning up or down of a thumb? This isn’t budgeting, it’s sudden death.

Why not distribute the same 23.85% cut equally across all student areas, thereby sharing the burden equitably? Let the students and advisers within these organizations then decide what should be cut rather than having a committee, with no mandate and no particular insight into the various student groups, pick the winners and losers. Take a look at Equation (4) (seen below). Only after doing simple arithmetic can one solve for (x). In this case, (x) is what S&A’s theoretical recommended amount would have been:

Under a smaller 23.85% cut, The Observer would theoretically be left with $42,929.56 – a serious blow but not a death sentence.

Additionally, after sifting through the S&A Committee’s March 17 Meeting on YouTube, we see at 1:48:29 that The Observer lists three options for potential funding amounts. With the “no printing” option, The Observer lists the base funding potentially being “$36,246.00,” excluding “the increase in web costs.” Overall, this amount would be sufficient in keeping The Observer financially supported, and, while not ideal, would allow the publication a future, albeit a reduced one.  

For PULSE, a 23.85% cut would leave the organization with $21,635.74 (calculated below), again, not ideal but manageable. 

The S&A Committee has stripped away much of the funding from numerous student organizations. The group has defunded years-old publications that allow students to write articles independently and create stories that involve members of the community. Additionally, student journalists not only learn about how publications and media work, they gain the initiative to seek out stories through an investigative lens. When students are assigned to cover an event or suggest a story idea at class meetings, they strive to learn more about their story before creating their first page: where it takes place, who to interview, what to photograph and how to contextualize the story for readers. Being a journalism student is not only about meeting deadlines; it’s about one teaching themselves on their story’s topic, thereby learning to write the story in an insightful way. “Docendo Discimus,” “By teaching, we learn,” a Latin phrase that is boldly shown on CWU’s seal. By defunding PULSE and The Observer, the committee has deprived students’ learning, the very core of any college institution. The committee has robbed students’ education; it has robbed us of everything. 

So, what is the way forward? With PULSE and The Observer on the chopping block due to these indefensible budget constraints, the hour is late to reverse them. However, the outpouring of solidarity and support for these two student media outlets from all walks of life – students, staffers and alumni – have showcased how powerful we can be in showing our disdain to the S&A Committee, which has no right to pick winners and losers. Perhaps the Board of Trustees will see the unfairness of the current recommendations and substitute a more rational and equitable outcome.