Tonight’s meeting of the University Park Undergraduate Association offered, in effect, a puzzling dilemma, a curious Catch-22. If students aren’t aware of UPUA, how can the student government attract the attention of its constituency? And yet, for those students who follow the weekly soap opera, now well into its sixth season, an alternate question is posed–how can the UPUA justify spending more than $3,000 on branded sunglasses, cups, and pens?

According to the text of the legislation, which indeed passed last night, the sunglasses, cups, and pens will be distributed to students in a newly launched promotional campaign that will “publicize the work of UPUA and how it can benefit students.” The items themselves will “be used to promote recognition of UPUA’s name.”

Sure enough, a vociferous if amicable debate ensued following the presentation of the legislation by Programming Chair Kyle Lorenz. Governmental Affairs Chair Adam Boyer offered perhaps the most comprehensive rebuttal of the proposal, attacking it on numerous fronts.

“I wish I could support this legislation, but I can’t,” Boyer began. “We’re convincing ourselves that people don’t know who we are and what we do.”

He rattled off past promotional events that had similar aims–to increase brand recognition of the UPUA, and to spread awareness of the group’s very existence–and were met with general ambivalence, using that as a springboard to communicate his skepticism of the current campaign. Boyer pointed to coverage of the UPUA in the student newspaper as evidence that it’s not as though one has to look hard to find evidence of the student government’s existence.

And like many outside observers, Boyer noted that the best way to attract student attention is to earn it.

“A cup says what we are, but it doesn’t say what we do. If we put on events–UPUA sponsors this, UPUA does this–publicizing events is better than publicizing an organization without saying what the organization does.”

He also posed the question to his fellow assembly members to look beyond their own organization when voting on the legislation. Boyer said that he asked some of his constituents “what they would think if UPUA spent $3,000 of their money on sunglasses, hats, and pens” and found that they wouldn’t be too happy about that.

Of course, Lorenz defended the bill that made it through his committee, explaining that although previous efforts had been met with lukewarm results, this one could be different.

“I’m just saying this is something we’ve never tried before.” Lorenz said,” Just because some things didn’t work, that doesn’t mean this won’t.”

“If you have these recurring items that students are using, it’s UPUA, UPUA, UPUA–maybe after seeing someone with UPUA glasses, they’ll say ‘hey, maybe I will check this out.’”

There was also a special brand of irony present from Nick Grassetti, who juxtaposed this campaign against past promotional efforts.

“If I hand someone a pair of sunglasses with UPUA on it and they don’t know what it is, they’ll ask me ‘what’s oop-wa?'” Grassetti said. “Meanwhile, if there’s pizza, they’ll just take a slice and move on.”

Of course, during last year’s infamous “donut debate,” Grassetti took a different tack. “We’re college kids. One of the best incentives is food,” he said last November.

But others, like Brenden Dooley, seemed to hold the student body in low regard, arguing that many–if not most–students didn’t even know that the University Park Undergraduate Association existed.

“Some of my friends make fun of us, They ask ‘what the hell do we do for the students'” Dooley said, before throwing his support behind the promotional campaign. “It’s good for programming and it’s good for UPUA,” he said.

But in all, it seemed that too many members–as evidenced by the 25-15 margin by which the legislation passed, didn’t realize the real reason behind UPUA’s lack of visibility on campus. Chairwoman of the Assembly Kelly Terefenko, who voted for it, was one of them. “If we’re going to say that we’re as well known as we will be, then that’s sad. We had 16% turnout at our last election,” she said.

If Terefenko thinks that handing out cups and sunglasses will turn Penn State into a hotbed of campus political discourse regarding its student government, she’s sadly mistaken. Throughout the night, both Onward State and President T.J. Bard solicited student input to the proposal on Twitter, and the reaction was almost unanimously negative.

Granted, those replies came from those on campus active enough to get involved, even virtually, in the debate–those who follow their student body president, and respond to the UPUA discussion on a Wednesday night. But it’s obvious to see their point, the same one Adam Boyer made. Promotion made for its own sake isn’t giving students a reason to get involved. I sincerely doubt that any previously disinterested students will become a part of the minority contingent who cares about UPUA just because they have a cup with those initials on it.

In fact, the Assembly even defeated a proposal that would’ve at the very least looked good on paper, an amendment to the legislation which would have prevented members of UPUA from taking the cups, sunglasses, or pens. The hubris of those who voted down the amendment was perhaps exemplified by Justin Laskowski.

“We pay the same fee, and we give our time for the students,” Laskowski said. “If anything, I think we deserve them.”