Wearing the voting booth blindfold

I tried my hardest to attend Tuesday’s Student Union Executive Board election debate. I really did. I have an interest in these things; I write a column, I love elections and I enjoy a good debate. But I had a tiring day at work on Tuesday and had too much to do that night, so I skipped the event.

Is it any surprise that according to The Daily Free Press, of the 100 students attending the debate, only four were there out of interest? If even I could not muster the strength to attend an event I cared about, should we be shocked that the thousands of students who couldn’t care less didn’t show up?

No, we can’t be surprised the debate had a low turnout because Boston University students never turn out for anything. Yet these debates are essentially the community’s only chance to learn about the candidates for the Student Union E-board, a group which has perhaps the greatest potential to address our most pressing needs, such as a more lenient guest policy, a more comprehensive non-discrimination policy and cable.

The Student Union election website offers no information on the candidates themselves — no biographies, no platforms, not even the names of the people running under each of the three slates. Most of the individual schools and colleges are running uncontested elections this year. But who are the people who make up these slates and who made them the default leadership of this school?

One of the reasons the Boston University community suffers from a severe lack of information about the candidates is because even the slates themselves have told us very little. I’ve seen advertising for just one slate, New Blood, but even its literature lists only the names of the members of their slate, not their biographies. But what about the other two slates whose advertising I haven’t seen? And what about the unchallenged slates for the College of Communication, School of Education, College of Engineering, School for the Arts and the Local Students Union — these groups don’t even need to advertise because they have achieved victory before the election even takes place.

My question is not rhetorical: who are these people and what makes them qualified to lead the school? Will we see them submit letters to the Free Press to try to reach a greater audience? The Free Press has been covering the election as best it can, but it is not the obligation of the paper to do outreach for the campaigns.

I think that way in which students must vote blindly contributes to two greater problems at BU: the lack of commitment we’ve seen this year among top elected student officials and a lack of productivity from the Student Union E-board. Low voter turnout and a lack of voter education leads to a lack of accountability on the part of the students we elect.

For example, while the only COM slate is guaranteed to win the election, its members will never really be accountable to any constituency because voters were never really given a choice. And Student Union E-Board will never feel charged with the duty to make good on campaign promises if they never receive a mandate, or even a nod, from educated voters who support their platforms.

I can’t blame this situation on voter apathy. I don’t think BU students are apathetic in this case; I think issues like cable, dorm life and discrimination hit very close to home for most of us, and I think most students are truly interested in seeing these issues addressed. But I think students are too busy to begin hunting down information on the slates. Students shouldn’t be expected to attend the debates, which aren’t usually meant to provide general background anyway, in order to make an informed choice. This isn’t a case of student apathy because I am not the least bit apathetic on the subject and even I have found it impossible to find the information I need to make an informed choice when I cast my vote — and wait, how do I cast my vote again?

In the future, the Student Union should make use of the one medium by which they can reach all students — the Internet. For example, the home page of the BU website and the Student Link should both feature links to detailed information about the slates (or at least provide us with their names), which the election committee should require all slates to provide at the offset of the election season.

In this case, I think the biographies of slate members are more important than their ideas, since we’ve suffered more from lack of commitment than from a lack of ideas this year. Right now it doesn’t matter whether the election is between three slates or seven; as long as we are without information, we are without a real choice.