This letter is addressed to not only the editor and staff of the Maneater, but to any concerned individuals who read the article [“MSA Outreach endorsements fall in gray area”](https://www.themaneater.com/stories/2011/10/4/msa-outreach-endorsements-fall-gray-area/). Hopefully the following response will clear things up:
MSA Outreach has and will continue to reach out to students and student organizations. The importance of these relationships that are being established with student organizations and students cannot be spoken of enough. It is extremely important that students and student organizations know that their student government is here for them, as a resource, an involvement opportunity, or an avenue to make the Mizzou experience better for them.
The article that was written about Outreach makes the implication that members of my committee, including myself, will use Outreach as a tool for the different campaigns that they support. I want to be very clear in stating that if I suspect or hear about any misuse of Outreach in anyway by any of the members in my committee, regardless of what slate they support or do not support, they will immediately be removed and reported to the BEC. I hold myself and the slate I assist to these same standards. If there are any instances where anyone feels that my committee members or I are not abiding by the rules, please contact me immediately or report it to the BEC.
With that being said, I 100 percent defend and support every single person that is in Outreach. The reason I chose each and every individual in that committee was because I know how much of an asset they could be to Outreach and how much they care about what we stand for. In no way do I think it is wrong that individuals that are highly involved in campaigns, if not the candidates themselves, are a part of this committee. In fact, I would expect nothing less. This just shows how much they recognize the importance of what Outreach does. It is because of this that I know that none of them would abuse their position. They are not involved in Outreach to win an election, but to simply make Mizzou a better place, which I think attests to how great the three slates this year are.
When I first received this position, I had no knowledge of who would be running for MSA president/vice-president. I have gotten Outreach going without any political motivations, but the sole fact that I love my job. “Fired up!” is a phrase that is commonly used by my committee and I because meeting with all of these different students and organizations provides so many new ideas for our campus, it really is energizing. Every week I sit in our meetings and hear about how they have been thrilled that MSA is trying to establish a relationship with them; it is almost like they had no clue that we were there. It truly is fascinating to speak with leaders of all different organizations and hear how they were able to achieve what they have, and hear future plans for their organizations and how MSA can help. It’s an awesome feeling to know that we are making a difference on campus, and that fires me up. I intend to keep my job as chairman regardless of who wins the election, and I would never do anything to jeopardize that. I don’t do this job to help a slate get elected; neither do any of my committee members, regardless of what political aspirations they have. We do this because we all can see the impact it makes in MSA and on campus.
I take issues with the article for several reasons, the first being that no writer from the Maneater has ever attended a single Outreach meeting, despite all that we do. It is hard to understand how an article can be written making negative implications and assumptions towards the dynamics of outreach when you haven’t even seen how it operates. Secondly, the article that was written did the exact thing that it was trying to accuse outreach of: connect MSA Outreach and Presidential Slates. That connection had yet to be made between any student organizations I have met with to this day. I’ve never heard complaints or concerns from a single student or organization about slates being involved in Outreach, which is more evidence to support the fact that candidates are separating their positions from their campaigns. Finally, and most importantly, I cannot come to understand the fact that two articles have been written on Outreach despite its formation in March. And given all that has been accomplished, the longest and most detailed article is criticizing us. In all honesty, you have missed the real story: all that we are trying to do for student organizations like yourself.
