Once again, there is controversy surrounding an election run by the Student Union Elections Commission. SUEC is still in a shamble, even after having four months to clean house and start fresh after poorly running last year’s Union Executive Board Elections. Their performance is an embarrassment to this year’s Union E-board, which repeatedly reiterated their commitment to reviving the importance of student government for all students, and undermines all the current Union initiatives.
SUEC commissioners, including the body’s chairwoman, Jeanette Jankiewicz, confirmed yesterday students could have voted multiple times in last week’s Union Senate elections. The commission’s half-hearted treatment of elections over the past two years prompted Senate Tribunal member Lisa Franchini to come forward with the special body’s wrong-doings and resign early yesterday morning, citing frustration and little confidence in the legitimacy of the Union as a representative democracy.
She has a point.
Despite facing criticism for their poor work last year, this year’s Union Senate elections fell victim to late organization and poor management, two distinctions which have graced several Union elections in a row. The Union’s last two e-boards have shirked their responsibilities to reform an obviously broken system and failed the entire student body in their inaction. Their latest responses to SUEC’s poor work smack of apathy and show that, despite their contentions that the Union’s constitutional system mirrors the United States republic, the Union is little more than fake democracy.
Franchini showed principle in blowing the whistle on SUEC’s deficient work and giving up an activity that she clearly feels passionate about.
SUEC’s poor election efforts make the Union look shoddy in the eyes of administrators they have tried to impress with unified and organized efforts to change Boston University policy. If they cannot run their own elections, how can they be taken seriously as the unified voice of the student body? How can Chancellor John Silber be assured their proposals to change the Guest Policy really do take into account the administration’s much touted, though little proven, silent majority?
The system has been broken for several years. However, Jankiewicz’s contention that she oversaw elections in the same manner as past SUEC commissioners is inadequate. Jankiewicz said she knew of the election system’s flaws at least two weeks prior to Senate elections. She should have worked to seek out the system’s flaws and acted to fix the system, rather than simply accepting the status quo and flawed elections.
The Union’s next step must be to rewrite the constitutional provisions relating to SUEC and hold new Senate elections with a revamped commission. Otherwise, this year’s Union Senate should be considered illegitimate and lacking validity as true representatives of the student body.
The Union’s constitution is far too restrictive to account for a SUEC commissioner’s resignation after the Senate is adjourned for the academic year, as happened with former Commissioner John Macom’s resignation in May. Union leaders should revise the constitution to allow more leeway for situations as likely as happened early this summer. Unfortunately, because there is no legitimate Senate, any constitutional reforms made before new Senate elections cannot possibly be ratified by the Senate. But this is a dire situation — changes must be made promptly to ensure the Senate truly does represent the student body and prevent the Union from losing a whole year.
Senate elections should be re-held only after sufficient constitutional reforms have been made. If online voting cannot be set up quickly enough, the logical procedural changes, such as Terrier Card checks, should be made to ensure that each student is allowed only one vote. Only fair and accurate elections can guarantee that the Senate truly has the student body’s mandate to spend its undergraduate student fee.
Union E-board members should be the first to ask for a thorough Tribunal investigation into this year’s election follies and should be active in seeking the requisite reforms. Union President Ethan Clay should work to lead the Union past its problems and onto greener pastures. He should not fall victim to inaction, as have past Union presidents in the face of SUEC incompetence.
But to ensure the Union will actually work to reform the constitution, the Student Activities Office should withhold all Union Senate and e-board funding until the proper reforms are in place and a new Senate has been sworn in. Left to their own devices, previous Unions have been unresponsive to the need for SUEC reform, a deplorable track record which should not warrant the extension of any more trust from the student body or SAO. An honor system, as was applied in this year’s Senate elections, is obviously not good enough.
The Union’s chances are finally up. After several years of frequent criticism for terrible performances, it is time to act. Any delay in fixing the Union’s problems with its constitution and this year’s Senate elections is unacceptable. Union leaders need to work quickly and thoroughly to fix SUEC and elect a legitimate group of senators.
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
