Why Union failed

There are two types of people in Boston University’s Student Union: those who care and those who care about themselves. To those in the first category, know that the following is not directed towards you. Every initiative that succeeds is due to you, and the whole student body owes you gratitude. You are a pleasure to work with. To those in the second category ‘- well, read on.

I’m worried about the future of Union.

I’m worried for a very simple reason: Union attracts the wrong sort of people. Maybe it’s the title ‘student government’ that invokes visions of grandeur, inspiring students to be good little statesmen. Maybe it’s the shiny silver nametag. A proud few are killing the productivity and (rather ironically) the image of an otherwise functional advocacy group.

Every year, it seems Union has a new crop of people determined to make a name for themselves. During last summer’s freshmen orientations, a few students each session approached now-departing President Matt Seidel asking how they could become president of Student Union. They knew nothing of Union, save that it was the student government for BU. There was no willingness to learn, only a desire to control.

And of course, it’s not always the freshmen who make a bid for power. Some people join Union in the fall simply to run in the spring.’ Most often, you see these people doing their best to make the current executive board look inept, in order to be saviors come election time.’ This is one of the reasons Union never appears to accomplish much – the most outspoken of us speak only ill.

If it were only words, Union could bear it well enough, but the underlying competitive nature of a few members is even more destructive. Countless hours are wasted trying to reconcile breaches in perceived hierarchy. I can’t think of a Union member that isn’t aware of this fact. And yet, responding to the ‘New Frontier’ slate’s withdrawal from the race, President-elect James Sappenfield stated, ‘Admittedly, there is a little bit of disappointment on my part because I did enjoy the thrill of the competition’ (”Vision’ is sole Union slate; debates cancelled,’ April 2).

Let’s quickly evaluate the campaigning process. You spend hours per day for a solid week trying to convince other people why you’re superior to the people who should be your colleagues. It’s easier to criticize than to come up with novel and useful ideas, so you criticize. You become a walking smear machine.

By the end of it all, you’ve alienated 50 percent of Union who agrees with you on 80 percent of the issues. When you’re elected over the slate they support, your opposition will likely leave. Remember John Dallas Grant said last year in the debate that Union was too big a part of his life for him to leave, even if he lost? I guess when he said he’d stay, he meant for 30 minutes at the first meeting. His supporters are similarly absent. Oops.

Basically, campaigning is one of the nastiest and most inefficient (not to mention expensive) things you will ever do in student government. If you’re running for office, you’d better honestly believe you would do a better job than the other candidates. So, no competitive elections should give you all their benefit – getting you in office, that is – without the unfortunate side effects. Why on earth would anybody be disappointed with this result?

Here’s a hint: it starts with ‘e’ and ends with a synonym for ‘leave.’

In any case, Mr. Sappenfield, don’t despair. Even though you haven’t had a campaigning period yet, you will next fall. You’ll find yourself forced to work with people who desire nothing more than to make you look foolish, only so they can be undermined the year after. It makes things run ever so smoothly.

The bottom line is that the ‘thrill of competition’ has no place in Union. If that’s what you’re looking for from an extracurricular, play broomball. Union has no home for you. Do something where the competition is a virtue and not a source of inefficiency. If you can’t get an equal or greater thrill from cooperation, then your administration is already doomed.

If you want to fix Union, strip it of its prestige. Eliminate the title of ‘student government’ and the school-wide campaign that only a narcissist could love. Union is not a forum for self-congratulation, and everyone who signs up for Union should be aware of that. Union members are public servants, and I mean that in the strongest sense of the word. The less honor given to representatives, the more respectable Union will become.