Several clubs are now finding that they don’t have enough money to function. However, this isn’t because they spent too much; it’s because they spent too little.

Recent mid-year reviews for clubs resulted in budget cuts for more than a third of student organizations. Furthermore, an astounding 14 clubs have been put on probation. These and all other figures were provided by the Office of Student Leadership and Engagement.

Speaking as president of the GuilCo Gamers, these cuts were not only unprecedented and damaging — leaving several clubs with next to or less than nothing — they were unnecessary. Senate regained almost 40 percent of its general allocations budget, bringing it to about 60 percent in mid-February. A month later, the general allocations budget was still above 50 percent.

That’s insanely high for this time in the academic year. Senate cannot possibly use its budget before the end of the year, making the large scale of these cuts ridiculous.

Getting information about these cuts has been difficult. As a club leader, I had to wait three weeks to get any information, and some clubs are still waiting.

There is also a lack of transparency. When notified of their budget cut, clubs were told that Inter-Club Council and Senate made the decision. However, after finally getting more information, my club was told that ICC made the decision with the consultation of some Senate Executives — and that since both are part of Senate, Senate made the decision.

Senate Executives are not Senate. ICC is not Senate. The combined whole of Senate is the only thing that is Senate. The distinction is important, as this was much less open than it was portrayed.

I don’t expect perfection from my student government. In fact, a number of the cuts and issues of probation were fair. But, many were questionable.

I want improvement and support. As it is, there is no institutional support from Senate to clubs. Instead, there is salutary neglect.

ICC, though its stated purpose is to facilitate collaboration between student organizations, seems to exist to keep tabs on organizations. Clubs are required to file monthly activity reports and attend meetings, but clubs get no benefit from this.

Student organizations receive a budget from Senate, and should be accountable. But beyond a budget, Senate gives no support. This is not an issue unique to our current Senate, but an ingrained institutional problem.

When a club messes up, the action is disciplinary, such as a budget cut or probation. But what’s really needed is for someone to be willing to talk with that club, and figure out what problems they’re experiencing, and what can be done to improve.

Running a club is hard, and there are several ways Senate can better aid student organizations. Senate cannot continue to treat clubs the same when each club has different needs. The one ICC chair senator is not enough to handle the needs of all 50 student organizations. Most of all, clubs need proactive support to be successful, not discipline.

This is why these cuts hurt so much. Clubs do their best to contribute to the community, and they do it on their own. To have discipline come from a parent organization that offers nothing but a budget is not fair.

The effects of these cuts are far-reaching. If you ever attend club-sponsored events, if you think you might want to start a new club, if you have ever attended a Senate meeting, if you listen to WQFS, if you read The Guilfordian, then this affects you, and you need to care.