Running a Clean Race

The fiasco of last year's race for Undergraduate Council president--one of the most bitter and acrimonious in recent history--was a direct result of an inept election commission that enforced campaign rules arbitrarily and enigmatically. Thankfully, preliminary signs indicate that this year's race will be conducted, at the very least, a little cleaner.

Members on the election commission this year have all but pledged to enforce campaign rules with stringent fervor. It is about time. Campaign rules--which impose spending caps, regulate donations and designate appropriate postering techniques--ensure that candidates are granted equal opportunity. The actions of last year's commission, which haphazardly conducted investigations of alleged violations and arbitrarily made rulings, were inexcusable. For this year's commission to make good on its promise, it must be prepared to actively and thoroughly investigate any allegations of rules violations, no matter how unpleasant or unpopular.

It is to be expected that members on the commission might privately support certain candidates. Recognizing that composition is crucial to function, the council has wisely made the commission as "bipartisan" as possible. Both critics and supporters of the council's current leadership will oversee the election process. Although the two groups were on different sides during last year's "battle over buttons," they share a common desire to restore integrity and honesty to our student government.

There is nothing desirable about a tainted election. The uncertainty that hangs in the aftermath, like some noxious fume, poisons intentions and debilitates resolve. Bringing our council into the clear is no easy task. But an election commission that is both fair and harsh is a good start.