2008 Woodie Awards
Democratizing student politics
Issue date: 4/24/08
The Student Council Appeals Panel decision to disqualify all the candidates running for the Executive Council and hold another election is mired with confusion and controversy. It has once again displayed the bureaucratic and insular nature of Student Council.
It is very possible that holding another election will be necessary. Before the appeals, five of the nine candidates running for office were disqualified by the Committee on Student Elections (CSE). Certainly, the elections proved to be a complete debacle, and few viable solutions were left. During the appeals process, the Appeals Panel decided that it would be prudent to disqualify all candidates and hold another election.
The Panel, however, never gave any reason for the mass disqualifications. If the four candidates who avoided punitive action by the CSE actually merited disqualification, holding another election would be understandable. However, the Appeals process was so opaque that it calls into question the legitimacy of the decision.
If the four other candidates were disqualified due to misdeeds, the reasons for their disqualifications must be made known to the student body. This is important for a number of reasons. First, many don't understand why the Student Council is having another election. If a handful of candidates ran clean campaigns, this election effectively punishes them by holding new elections. Moreover the punishment to those who did not follow the rules is negated.
The problem is that we don't even know if the candidates who were not disqualified by the CSE are innocent or not. The student government needs to be more transparent about these issues. The hope is that the new Student Government Association will be a transparent and effective advocate student interests. This election is particularly important because it will decide what direction the student government will take in the future. Students already voted and now that election, damaged by broken rules, irresponsible behavior and electoral incompetence, will be instantly negated. Students need to know why.
It is very possible that holding another election will be necessary. Before the appeals, five of the nine candidates running for office were disqualified by the Committee on Student Elections (CSE). Certainly, the elections proved to be a complete debacle, and few viable solutions were left. During the appeals process, the Appeals Panel decided that it would be prudent to disqualify all candidates and hold another election.
The Panel, however, never gave any reason for the mass disqualifications. If the four candidates who avoided punitive action by the CSE actually merited disqualification, holding another election would be understandable. However, the Appeals process was so opaque that it calls into question the legitimacy of the decision.
If the four other candidates were disqualified due to misdeeds, the reasons for their disqualifications must be made known to the student body. This is important for a number of reasons. First, many don't understand why the Student Council is having another election. If a handful of candidates ran clean campaigns, this election effectively punishes them by holding new elections. Moreover the punishment to those who did not follow the rules is negated.
The problem is that we don't even know if the candidates who were not disqualified by the CSE are innocent or not. The student government needs to be more transparent about these issues. The hope is that the new Student Government Association will be a transparent and effective advocate student interests. This election is particularly important because it will decide what direction the student government will take in the future. Students already voted and now that election, damaged by broken rules, irresponsible behavior and electoral incompetence, will be instantly negated. Students need to know why.
Be the first to comment on this story