Choi says AAA debates need to be more inclusive.
"Before they take a position on an issue, that should convene a general meeting and raise it," he says.
Cho says he feels that it would be impractical to take a general vote on every issue.
An Open Forum
Other students counter that AAA should, instead of claiming to offer a political voice, simply serve an educational purpose as a forum for debate.
"It's great if they foster dialogue and dissent without imposing an agenda," Choi says. "That broadens minds, respects Asian Americans more as people capable of forming their own opinions."
To Jung, that is already the organization's purpose, even as it takes a stand on political issues.
"There's a difference between how we're perceived and what we are," Jung says. "There's a tendency for the general population to look at a group as a voice for the whole minority. We're just a group of individuals who are interested in Asian-American issues."
For instance, in the tabling against proposition 187, Jung says AAA was serving an educational purpose.
"We're not ramming our view down anyone's throats," she says. "The tabling stimulated discussion. We welcomed the opportunity to have that debate."
To critics, however, the tabling against Proposition 187 shows how impossible it is for AAA to both take a stance and engage all 1200 Asian-American students.
"Granted they had a few pamphlets of facts, but they educated the about what's bad about it," Lee says. "Their agenda was clearly political."
"There is a danger in that whether people like it or not, we might be viewed as representative of all Asian-Americans, when we are really an organization that's for Asian Americans who want to be politically active," Jung says.