Popular Votes Stalled

Although amendments to the Undergraduate Council's constitution that would require popular elections of its president and vice president were called for last spring, the council still has not passed the package of changes to its bylaws necessary for such elections to actually take place.

At last night's meeting, former council vice-president Justin C. Label '96 expressed disappointment that this fundamental change to the council's structure has not yet been made.

"I'm getting nervous," Label told council members. "When we originally spoke about getting a bylaws package, we planned to have elections before Christmas break. It doesn't look like that's going to happen now."

Label is not alone in criticizing the council's current administration for not pushing through a package sooner. Many council members say they believe the council will lose legitimacy in the eyes of students and administrators if elections are not implemented soon.

Council executives, notably council president Robert M. Hyman '97-'98 and vice-president Brian R. Blais '97, defended their records in interviews last night, saying the elections are too important to be rushed into.

Hyman and Blais have both been working with an unofficial committee formed this semester to discuss the issues associated with the bylaw changes. According to them, such a forum is the best way to fully consider all of the possibilities.

"We have had a working group meeting since the week after Rob and I took office," Blais said. "We wanted to introduce a package early and have elections in December, but there are so many issues: who can run, when we have them, how to administer them, how to enforce spending caps. We don't want to run into this without discussing them."

According to Hyman, times and places for these meetings have been announced at the beginning of every council meeting, but many of those who have objected to the lack of progress have not been part of the process, he added.

Several plans are now being considered by that committee, among them ideas to hold elections either at the beginning of February or in April.

In either case, most council members seem to be in favor of officers holding year-long terms.

Label, however, said he thinks the best way to run elections is to have new officers take over first thing in the spring semester, serve over the summer and come back in the fall to lead the council to its next elections.

Blais and Hyman say the possibility still exists that elections will be held this semester, perhaps during reading period. The other alternative would be to hold elections early next semester.

Label said holding elections at these times would be inadvisable because they are particularly busy times for students, and there would be extremely low voter turnout.

"Elections should be in December, and that option has been subtilely usurped," Label said. "Everyone running for president this semester said this was a top priority and needed to be taken care of in the first couple of weeks. It's clear the council is not taking this as a priority.

"Essentially, if we don't have a popularly elected president by February first, we'll look like a joke," he added.

Blais disagreed, saying poorly run popular elections would be far more destructive to the council.

Will Rehling '86-'96, a council member who has been active in the planning of the bylaws package, said that the change to popular elections for council officers is the most important reform the council has ever enacted.

"We want it to work well. We want it to be impeccable. We want to make sure candidates have time to properly debate. We want to make sure no one can buy the elections," Rehling said.

Council members are of divided opinion about many of the specifics for the bylaws changes, but most agree there are a number of key issues aside from the timing of elections which need to be resolved.

The council decided last spring that there should be a spending cap for candidates but has yet to determine how high the cap should be, how money could be spent, how the cap should be enforced or if the council should fund the elections.

The nomination process for candidates has not been yet specified. Last spring the council decided candidates should be members of the council, but many are debating whether or not non-members should be allowed to run.

Another major issue is electronic voting. For the first time, first-years were allowed to vote via e-mail in the council's general elections this fall and posted record voter turnouts.

According to Blais, expanding this option to the entire campus will take major negotiations with the administration, which in turn will take time.

Elizabeth A. Haynes '98, former chair of the Student Affairs Committee, said she felt many of these issues could have been resolved by now if council executives had made it a higher priority this semester.

"We have a different set of leaders this semester and it hasn't been really high on their list," Haynes said.

In addition, Haynes warned that elections need to take place soon for them to be effective.

"The longer we wait, the lower voter turnout is going to be, and without high turnout, we're not going to be any better off than we were before," she said.

Wesley B. Gilchrist '98, a member of the council's Campus Life Committee, said the major turnover of council members that occurred this fall may have to do with the apparent lack of interest in bringing forth the bylaws changes.

"The majority of the U.C. is new," Gilchrist said. "It's not that they aren't concerned with it, it's just that they didn't have anything to do with it passing."

The new focus of the council has been a partial reason for the delay of elections, Blais said.

"Engaging in a prolonged debate on the council floor would have taken away from many other important issues we have discussed this semester," Blais said.

According to Hyman, no matter what happens with specific bylaws issues, the council will hold popular elections this year.

"In the end we will come up with a good package that will serve the students well," Hyman said. "I'm not worried.

In either case, most council members seem to be in favor of officers holding year-long terms.

Label, however, said he thinks the best way to run elections is to have new officers take over first thing in the spring semester, serve over the summer and come back in the fall to lead the council to its next elections.

Blais and Hyman say the possibility still exists that elections will be held this semester, perhaps during reading period. The other alternative would be to hold elections early next semester.

Label said holding elections at these times would be inadvisable because they are particularly busy times for students, and there would be extremely low voter turnout.

"Elections should be in December, and that option has been subtilely usurped," Label said. "Everyone running for president this semester said this was a top priority and needed to be taken care of in the first couple of weeks. It's clear the council is not taking this as a priority.

"Essentially, if we don't have a popularly elected president by February first, we'll look like a joke," he added.

Blais disagreed, saying poorly run popular elections would be far more destructive to the council.

Will Rehling '86-'96, a council member who has been active in the planning of the bylaws package, said that the change to popular elections for council officers is the most important reform the council has ever enacted.

"We want it to work well. We want it to be impeccable. We want to make sure candidates have time to properly debate. We want to make sure no one can buy the elections," Rehling said.

Council members are of divided opinion about many of the specifics for the bylaws changes, but most agree there are a number of key issues aside from the timing of elections which need to be resolved.

The council decided last spring that there should be a spending cap for candidates but has yet to determine how high the cap should be, how money could be spent, how the cap should be enforced or if the council should fund the elections.

The nomination process for candidates has not been yet specified. Last spring the council decided candidates should be members of the council, but many are debating whether or not non-members should be allowed to run.

Another major issue is electronic voting. For the first time, first-years were allowed to vote via e-mail in the council's general elections this fall and posted record voter turnouts.

According to Blais, expanding this option to the entire campus will take major negotiations with the administration, which in turn will take time.

Elizabeth A. Haynes '98, former chair of the Student Affairs Committee, said she felt many of these issues could have been resolved by now if council executives had made it a higher priority this semester.

"We have a different set of leaders this semester and it hasn't been really high on their list," Haynes said.

In addition, Haynes warned that elections need to take place soon for them to be effective.

"The longer we wait, the lower voter turnout is going to be, and without high turnout, we're not going to be any better off than we were before," she said.

Wesley B. Gilchrist '98, a member of the council's Campus Life Committee, said the major turnover of council members that occurred this fall may have to do with the apparent lack of interest in bringing forth the bylaws changes.

"The majority of the U.C. is new," Gilchrist said. "It's not that they aren't concerned with it, it's just that they didn't have anything to do with it passing."

The new focus of the council has been a partial reason for the delay of elections, Blais said.

"Engaging in a prolonged debate on the council floor would have taken away from many other important issues we have discussed this semester," Blais said.

According to Hyman, no matter what happens with specific bylaws issues, the council will hold popular elections this year.

"In the end we will come up with a good package that will serve the students well," Hyman said. "I'm not worried.