| OPINION
| October 15, 2004
Editorial/Our View
Off Target
Simply creating committees does
little if issues remain overlooked
In response to several disputes filed over
this past spring’s election, Student Congress has formed a
new committee to review the election code. But on Tuesday, SC voted
to accept suggested changes that had nothing to do with the original
complaints.
The review committee performed what should have been one of the
original election committee’s duties — to review and
amend the election code. Several disputes point out that this should
have been done as soon as problems arose before the election. Although
the results were ultimately upheld in a closed SC meeting, the disputes
exposed serious problems with the code.
The committee rejected complaints regarding the omission of a candidate’s
full name on the ballot and e-mail campaigning, which is prohibited
by the election code. Additionally, although the code specifically
states that “no [election committee] member shall be a candidate
for office,” at least two candidates were on the committee
this spring.
Most importantly, no procedures were established to address these
code violations, and the review committee failed to suggest any.
SC approved a fee for disputing elections and a decrease in the
amount of time a student has to dispute elections. Challenges to
election results must now be filed within three days instead of
five and may require students to fork over $25.
While the charge will only apply if the ruling does not go in the
challenger’s favor, many can’t afford to take the chance.
And if legitimate complaints such as name discrepancies on ballots
and illegal campaigning are ignored, why should they?
There are already 16 university committees and seven standing SC
committees with student representatives who are supposed to research
resolutions that will benefit the student body. More committees
make SC less efficient and more bureaucratic, and less will be accomplished.
Students expressed concerns about the power and presentation of
their voices, and those concerns should not be overlooked. SC was
created to voice and protect the interests of the students. Given
that the new election code is as vague as ever and does not address
the problems for which a new election committee was created, it
seems they still have some work to do.
|
|
Editorial
round-up
The issue:
Changes made to election code didn’t address last
spring’s problems and the wording remains vague
We suggest:
SC should address complaints immediately and thoroughly
to ensure that we stay on target with issues
|
|
|
