The SBA posted its 2009 election information on their website: gwsba.com. Some of their provisions seem odd.
First, there is one week between when students declare their candidacy and when voting takes places. Is that really enough time to learn about the candidates? Is this the way it has always been? A one week campaign season?
Second, campaigning may not start before 5:00 PM on February 17, 2009. If someone knows now that they want to run, why can’t they tell people and start talking about why they are going to run? This seems to give more advantage to incumbents who can talk to people about upcoming changes in the SBA before the start of campaigning.
Third, according to the SBA information packet: “No campaigning may be done via e-mail, Facebook, or other social networking sites. Candidates may not send any e-mails concerning their candidacy or the SBA Election (regardless of the number of recipients in the e-mail). Candidates may not post any announcements regarding their candidacy on the GW Portal. Candidates may not use any of the features available through Facebook or any other networking website (i.e. MySpace) – this includes the creation of groups or list-serves.” – Really? Why are we limiting how people can communicate with other students?
I’m interested to see if other students find these practices… at the least, odd.
— Madison Byrd
These requirements sound like bullshit to me. The campaign period is supposed to be a sort of audition for the position the candidate is seeking. The use of the networking sites and especially facebook would be an excellent and effective contribution to the SBA, and a person who is able to do so effectively should have a leg up over the candidates who are less tech-savvy.
yeah sounds pretty whack . looks like we’re headed for a saddam hussein 99% landslide in the SBA elections .
we kid because we love.
I certainly would love to see some new blood in the SBA.
The one week campaign seems especially odd to me. If the campaign were longer, it seems like your second concern wouldn’t be as big of a deal (though still a valid concern). The short campaign season lends itself to the idea that SBA candidates don’t need the time because the campaigns are pretty superficial anyway. Lets hope this isn’t the case, but the rules don’t seem to help change it in any way.
I agree that a one week campaign is too short, but the other restrictions noted are appropriate, in my opinion.
If there is no set date for campaigning then I can almost guarantee you that it’ll somehow turn into some ridiculous multiple month campaigning system where posters are tacked up constantly, etc. I think it just creates an efficient campaign period (assuming that the campaign period is longer than a week).
The prohibition on electronic campaigning seems appropriate for an obvious reason: do you want blast emails sent to you daily? I sure don’t. Imagine 15 candidates in the election, total, constantly sending emails. It’s not something I find appealing, but that’s just me. I guess there may be an argument for allowing someone to sign up on Facebook (or whatever site) for a candidates page, thus approving the communication. Maybe someone, i.e. Madison, can expand on why they would like that changed.
All in all, I’d call for a longer campaign period, with more town hall meetings as a way of letting students know what the candidate hopes to do in the coming year (because profs do not really appreciate candidates taking their time at the beginning of class to address students and really 5 minutes is not much anyway, nor do posters say anything substantial).
And honestly, I’ve read a number of complaints that on this site that the Senate does fell down on the job about _____, but not one person has ever contacted me about their comments or concerns. I’m very open to hearing from any student, even though I’m a Senator for the 2Ls, but so far it’s been me coming up with ideas on my own or overhearing griping in the hall that I pick up on. So please, take an active roll and let me know directly what you’re looking for.
I don’t want 10 emails a day, but I’d like some information – maybe if they rules created a cap?
I don’t think my inbox would be flooded. Who has the ability to send “blast emails” to the student body besides the SBA president. And will group e-mail really be effective?
Treyer asked me to expand on why I think candidates should be allowed to use technology. First, I think the question is flawed and it is the prohibition that needs justification. That aside, I feel these technologies are deeply rooted in how we communicate. If you had one week to get a message out to everyone in the school wouldn’t using e-mail and the internet be the best way to reach people. I think if candidates send too many e-mails or use technology unwisely then they only disadvantage themselves. But cutting off the most effective and natural mode of communication only encourages shallow debate.
I feel that part of the difference in opinion about the rules stems from a difference in opinion about the definition of campaign. I do not think engulfing the school with fliers counts as campaigning. I suppose I am in favor of limiting fliers to a week or even eliminating them in favor of a green election. Maybe have one board where candidates can make their 8.5×11 pitch, but I’m not sure why fliers are seen as a main feature of campaigning. I think a campaign should be about candidates telling us why they care. A campaign should be about talking to students, discussing student concerns and community issues. Maybe candidates should invite students to a gathering to talk to them in person. Why not have a function at the school (maybe with some wine and cheese) where candidates and students mingle and talk about issues and what drives them to take on this responsibility.
I want an SBA who really cares about the school and about the students. I want an SBA who pushes students to care more about their community, not one that doesn’t bother announcing meetings because they don’t think students are interested. Are the people in the SBA really the people who care about this school?
A campaign of fliers and silly slogans would indeed be annoying if allowed to last for more than a week. A campaign of issues, policy and passion would be engaging and should be encouraged all year long.
Best,
Madison
As a guy who went through the election process a few times, I agree with Treyer on this point.
On limited electronic communication – As a candidate, your drive is to get your message out is really strong. Allowing the use of facebook / emails will lead to many mass e-mails. You can get anyone’s email address via the GW Law account, so Brett and I aren’t the only people who could ostensibly send mass e-mails out.
You always try to one-up your opponents, whether it be by speeches or campaign posters. Imagine the situation where candidate A writes a mass-email. Do you think Candidate B and C will not also take advantage and try to do the same thing? It goes back and forth and from my understanding, this has flooded the GW Law system in the past.
On the 1 week issue: I agree the one week is kind of short, but I think it’s probably because of the inevitable interruptions that happen during campaigns. For example, classes are interrupted for speeches and the halls are flooded with fliers which leads to arguments with waste management. I’m not trying to defend the policy, just give some sort of explanation as to why the rules are the way they are. People are always free to publicly talk about their wishes to run before the election starts as well. You really run for VP / Prez your entire 1L or 2L year by working for students and building trust with the student community.
If you do want change, by all means, contact a senator @ http://gwsba.com/modules/content/index.php?id=12. They can write legislation to see the changes you want in the election process.
Madison (I believe this is a pseudonym), I can’t help but take a little offense at questioning whether the SBA really cares about the school b/c we haven’t publicly announced the senate meetings. I’ve always announced them to the senators, and they’ve always been open to the student body. I am going to publicly announce them from now on even though we only had one visitor last time. It’s a good idea, and was something I didn’t think about.
I love criticism, it’s how I learn to do better. But please don’t put into question whether I care about school based on announcing senate meetings. I don’t think you know me personally, because if you did you would know I am always wracked with anxiety on making sure things go well for students. I know Liz can attest to that, haha.
I’ve always said (along with Brett), email me with any questions/concerns/ideas. Treyer is right in that it’s a two way street, and it’s always helpful to be able to talk about an issue with structured complaints as opposed to relying on lounge hearsay. My email is rereddy @ law in case you need it.
Take care friends,
Rahul
P.S. – I can’t wait for election season. It’ll be a lot more fun from the bleachers.
So is Rahul announcing that he is not running (i.e “from the bleachers”) or is Rahul using a mass communication to poise himself for the election?
I feel very conflicted about this blog.
There are lots of things that are posted here about the SBA with which I agree. There are many, MANY ways the SBA could change to be better. I want to be a part of that and I completely support that.
At the same time, the ideas here are so often accompanied by poison pills. Asking, “Are the people in the SBA really the people who care about this school?” is one such example. It’s offensive. I don’t want to be a part of that.
To quote you again, Madison, the premise of the question seems flawed. Without any actual work or research required, you know that the SBA exists, meets, and does “stuff.” So why does your question assume that individual members of the group don’t care about the school? Why would they be doing any of this, then?
Is it because you perceive they don’t share your priorities? Isn’t it possible, and perhaps a great deal more plausible, that they simply a) don’t know what you want or b) don’t agree with you?
It is easier to assume that the SBA doesn’t care, because it absolves you of responsibility — anything you could do would be futile, because the SBA doesn’t care.
But if you take the much more plausible idea that they don’t know or don’t agree, you do have to take action – tell them or convince them.
Treyer says above that no one emails him/her (something others on the SBA have said repeatedly on this blog), and Rahul said that even after all the agitating for publicized Senate meetings, only one outside student bothered to attend. So assuming the SBA doesn’t know what you want or agree with it — how would this tiny amount of action serve to inform or convince them? Is it really surprising that it doesn’t?
If there is a desire to contribute meaningfully to the SBA and change it to work better, then really do something. Email senators, or Rahul and Bret, or anyone. Sit in on some or all of the meetings. Find out what is going on. Tell them what you want. If an individual voice doesn’t feel sufficient, get together a group voice. Write a group letter or do a petition. Show up to a meeting as a group.
Assuming the SBA cares but may have differences of opinion (or doesn’t know) allows for a common ground and for this blog’s criticisms/proposals to have meaning (for example, Fish’s idea to ask questions of candidates and post answers).
By contrast, assuming the SBA doesn’t care leaves no room for common ground. It only serves to harden people; the poster assumes the SBA will do nothing with their criticism so why not add a low-blow, and the SBA assumes the poster isn’t really serious and misses the otherwise-good point attached to the snark. If the intention is for the SBA posts here to have meaning, this latter tactic isn’t a winning one.
I agree with B –
When we write about the school or the SBA, or invite others to do the same, there is an implicit understanding that the reason we are writing is either because we want to see things done differently or because we want to hold the school or the SBA accountable for all of their decisions. This is a fine and noble cause, and for many of us writers, was one of the reasons why we created this site in the first place (aside from just enjoying the sport of blogging in the first place!).
Let’s keep the discussion about the merits of the election restrictions. Emails vs. facebook vs. whatever? Good debate. Questioning whether the SBA actually cares about the school? Bad debate. Obviously, they care enough to have run for positions in the student government, and even if their priorities are different than yours or mine, it doesn’t mean that they don’t care at all.
(I, for the record, think that some of these election rules are bit ridiculous, but more on that in another comment)
Readers know that I’ve had my fair share of criticism for the SBA, especially with regards to the problem of closing the school right after Thanksgiving. Notwithstanding that, I really do applaud and appreciate that both the President and Vice President had come onto the site and answered the criticisms raised against them. You and I may not agree with their responses, but I give them credit for trying. B hit the nail right on the head – there’s a difference between holding the SBA’s feet to the fire and lobbing attacks at the SBA. I hope our readers choose the former.
And this is probably a good time to remind everyone: if you have a question you want us to submit to the candidates, please email suasponteblog (at) gmail (dot) com.
Now, as for the campaign rules:
I think a prohibition on email for the reasons stated makes sense – and unless you have flashy videos and fonts and you can send the email from David Plouffe’s account, chances are, I won’t read an email from a candidate.
The length should definitely be extended. I would suggest a month-long campaign season – with the final week the only time that campaign posters can be put up throughout the school. That should give us enough time to hold some town hall meetings/debates, meet the candidates, and explore some of their ideas. The final week of posters would serve just as a reminder of the various candidates for the different positions (admittedly, I would get rid of all posters, but they are traditional and don’t harm anyone, so…).
Does anyone know if there is a dedicated Thirsty Thursday for a “Meet the Candidates” forum? That would be nice. So would having different student organizations sponsoring candidate meet and greets and debates.
At the end of the day, I have to feel that I can trust whoever I decided to give my vote to. The best way to earn my trust is to talk with me and let me find out what kind of SBA rep. you will be.
I agree with Rahul that students need to let the SBA know what they are thinking — he advised me to contact my senators. Senators can consider this an open letter from a student requesting that the SBA reconsider their campaign process. I am not sending it to a personal e-mail account because I would rather see it discussed here with other students.
If spamming was a problem in the past, maybe there should be restrictions on e-mail use. But as the rule reads “Candidates may not send any e-mails concerning their candidacy or the SBA Election (regardless of the number of recipients in the e-mail)” it seems too broad. As written, I doubt that it is followed.
It is most likely too late to alter this campaign schedule, but I would like the new senate to consider lengthening it next spring. I think it could be a structured process that focused on discussion and discouraged interrupting classes and spamming class mates. I like Hamilton’s proposal for a month-long campaign. Hamilton – are you running?
I also think that elections should be announced earlier; I would suggest the first week of the spring semester. This will give students time to think about whether and why they want to run.
If drafted, I will not run; if nominated, I will not accept; if elected, I will not serve.
I agree with B and Rahul – Madison you were out of line with the implied suggestion in your comment: “I want an SBA who really cares about the school and about the students. I want an SBA who pushes students to care more about their community, not one that doesn’t bother announcing meetings because they don’t think students are interested. Are the people in the SBA really the people who care about this school?”
As B said and as someone who is friends with many members of the SBA who are willing to bend over backwards to do a job that, frankly, I don’t know why they WANT to do sometimes, my curiosity and willingness to listen to your point is totally and utterly dashed with comments like that. I just dismiss it as one more attempt to fish for controversial comments rather than an attempt at actual dialogue or change. Stick to your concrete suggestions designed for solutions or explanations rather than soapboxing – the former is much more effective than the latter.
That said and turning to Treyer’s suggestion, I agree, the one-week time frame seems to limit the ability of students to campaign. It seems that the other provisions re: posters and using facebook/emails/etc. would serve to limit the inconveniences that might be felt by students if the campaign time was longer. Additionally, in years past, the Nota Bene used to feature profiles of each candidate running for office and publish their platforms for the students. However, because the election schedule conflicts with our publishing schedule (which is decided before the election schedule), we’re unable to revive this feature which could be more helpful for students deciding their representatives.
Unfortunately, like last semester’s problem with the shortened reading period, students don’t seem to mobilize in time to lobby for change until it’s too late. I second the prospective solution from Madison and Treyer – email your senators with your thoughts and help propose draft legislation for next year’s elections so we don’t run into these complaints for another year in a row…
I just wanted to make one comment about the Facebook/Technology issue: last year there was a no email rule because we didn’t want this to become a popularity contest-like whoever has the most facebook friends or gmail contacts gets elected. Then there was some confusion on how far that rule stretched so while I wasn’t party to the rulemaking this year, I assume the blanket restrictions were born from that line of thinking paired with last year’s confusion.