The Board of Elections (BoE) is one step away from putting last week's freshman elections to bed. They've eliminated a needlessly complicated, archaic voting system. They've helped boost voter turnout to the highest it's been in years. They've managed to hold an election that was marked by voter support rather than candidate disqualifications. And none of this means a thing. Not until the BoE releases voting tallies for each of the elections.
They've been reticent to do so at this point. BoE co-chairs Rick Aseltine and Matt Bouloubasis have said that the board is currently forming their policy on releasing tallies, and that a decision will be reached sometime this week. While the BoE's consideration is somewhat encouraging, their timing on this issue has been downright insensitive. Frankly, this decision should have been made at least a week before the election, not a week after.
Candidates have had the opportunity to see vote tallies had they e-mailed the BoE, a privilege the BoE neglected to mention to any of the candidates. "We didn't see a need for it," said Aseltine. "I would think that's assumed." Well, it's an assumption that seems particularly callous considering candidates only had 48 hours to request a recount.
And while we'd be wary to accuse the BoE of dragging their feet in their consideration of a release policy, we must question what there is to consider. The need for transparency in university elections is an obvious one. As Student Council President Charles Reyner asked, "How can you prove that someone won without releasing the numbers?" Bouloubasis countered saying that although tallies have been released in the past, the BoE had no obligation to do so. We disagree.
The board might not have a written obligation to release tallies, but they certainly have a moral one. While no one is accusing the BoE of fabricating election results, voters should have the right to know whether the winning candidates have a mandate to serve. With Student Council elections at Hopkins regularly decided by the power of incumbency, establishing strong leadership early is of the utmost importance. The results of this election will surely reverberate through Student Council through the next four years.
This is an issue that becomes especially relevant with the BoE's recent decision to abandon the Single Transferable Voting (STV) system. While few are mourning its loss, the News-Letter included, its particular usefulness was eliminating the need for run-off elections. A single-vote system offers no such protection. If, for instance, an election were decided by a single vote, margin of error alone would dictate the need for a run-off.
We do hope the BoE makes the right decision and includes full tally disclosure in their new policy. It may be the last step in their string of successes, but it is by far the most important.
