Two years ago, I walked into the Russell House senate chamber as a newly elected senator, later serving as treasurer, believing we could tighten a few bolts and fix what was broken.
I was wrong.
What I found wasn’t a fixable glitch. It was a system so convoluted, outdated and politically compromised that even well-meaning participants were reduced to triage. This isn’t a policy problem. It’s a structural failure of the Student Government finance system.
Student politicians are managing essential finances — and we’re surprised by the chaos? It’s time we move funding logistics out of students' hands and into professional ones.
“They're like, 'Oh, we just use a P-card, or we got it from the account,' ... They get to spend their time engineering, which is great. They don't have to worry about funding personal assets or doing a large quantity of pencil pushing for every dime,” said Matthew Burnett, a third-year aerospace engineering student and president of USC’s Rocketry Club.
A P-card, or purchasing card, is a university-issued credit card that lets approved users buy materials directly using university funds, no reimbursement required.
But this dysfunction isn’t new; it’s just the latest chapter in a century-long saga. USC’s student organization funding process dates back to 1918. Since then, the system has changed names and formats but has never truly functioned.
In the ’70s, the Student Allocations Commission collapsed amid inter-branch disputes. By 1980, it was already labeled "chaotic." Every decade repeats the same story: delays, underfunding and clubs punished over paperwork.
Burnett said the reimbursement-only model means many clubs delay events for months or cancel them entirely — not because they lack ideas, but because they can’t afford to float the costs upfront.
If the process has failed for over a hundred years, maybe the problem isn’t bad execution; maybe it’s bad design.
When I became treasurer, I saw it firsthand. My "staff" were volunteers torn between helping organizations and passing classes. Then fall break hit; and with it, the reimbursement system crashed. $30,000 in student requests were rejected overnight.
But even when funding is approved, it doesn’t guarantee impact. “If they don’t have the money to personally fund (an event), then nothing gets done,” Burnett said. “That’s a huge issue".
It’s not just a USC problem. At Georgia Tech, Montclair State and Michigan, student governments abused funding power; and universities had to clean up the mess.
Whenever I’ve raised this issue within Student Government, one retort inevitably surfaces: that Student Government is a place to “learn leadership skills.” It’s a popular refrain, usually offered by those who benefit most from the current structure; those with the time, money and connections to navigate it without consequences.
But here’s what never gets asked: Should leadership "training" come at the expense of organizations? Should clubs be forced to cancel events so a few student politicians can play bureaucracy?
A professionally run system is a structural overhaul that addresses the root causes of failure. When university staff are responsible for processing funding, timelines don’t collapse during midterms. Reimbursements can operate on rolling schedules instead of being tied to arbitrary deadlines.
There’s consistency because staff don’t turn over every year or leave for class. And if something does go wrong, there’s accountability; not just a student committee shrugging and promising to revisit the bylaws "next session."
The Daily Gamecock reached out to Student Government, but at the time of publication were unavailable for comment.
Burnett has suggested project-based grants as a solution where organizations apply for funding early in the semester to support a series of related events. This approach would allow them to receive a lump sum and manage spending independently throughout the project. Without this kind of flexibility, technical organizations are forced to plan every minor detail far in advance; an approach that often leads to failure.
USC had already moved in this direction in the 2000s by removing student control over student media and Russell House programming. Auburn’s O-Board proves this hybrid system can work. Students advise and shape priorities while administrators run the logistics. And — surprise — it works.
USC’s new Student Organization Funding Assistance Board (SOFAB) is a start; a model where staff handle logistics while students offer guidance. But we need more than a start. The Department of Student Life should run the entire system; with students shaping priorities, not buried in bureaucracy.
We need a reimbursement platform that doesn’t feel like it’s held together by duct tape. We need an actual appeals process. And most of all, we need to take politics out of the vault and put student voices where they belong — shaping vision, not filing forms.
I resigned as treasurer because I realized I couldn’t fix the system from within. But that doesn’t mean it’s beyond repair. It fails not for lack of passion, but by design; power without responsibility, effort without impact. And unless we’re honest about that, this chaotic show won’t end.
We don’t need another year of excuses; we need a system that works. One where students lead, clubs thrive and red tape finally takes a backseat to results.
Let’s finally build something that works.