This HUA Election, Vote Your Conscience

The experienced veterans. The avowed outsiders. The self-styled satirists. And, for good measure, the ones who want to blow the whole thing up.

That’s right: We’re talking about the candidates running to lead Harvard’s student government.

This zany typology doesn’t just describe this year’s slate. In 2018, the ticket that earned our endorsement ran on policy and experience. In 2013, a joke pair promised more tomato basil soup in dining halls and thicker toilet paper in bathrooms. And in 2021, one candidate pledged to “defund” the student government system entirely.

The kicker? All of those candidates won.

The scatter-shot outcomes of student government contests at Harvard result from a persistent problem: Every year, the elections devolve into low-turnout political theater. The only difference is who plays the leading role.

Unfortunately, the turmoil that always seems to surround student government overshadows its less-glamorous but genuinely essential function: funding clubs that sit at the center of student life. Students don’t look to HUA officials for role models or a revolution — we just want elected accountants.

The job description of co-president hardly calls for a candidate with the political instincts of Pete Buttigieg ’04 or (god forbid) Elise M. Stefanik ’06 (R-N.Y.). All it demands is someone with the management ability to ensure an efficient stream of club financing and leverage what limited influence they do have against unpopular University policies (the demise of shopping week and the shift to prior-term course registration come to mind).

Students can and should have a say in who will make these largely quotidian but nonetheless important decisions. The occasional election integrity scandal or feline candidate notwithstanding, preserving what little democratic input we have into our student life is a worthwhile endeavor.

That doesn’t mean that tomorrow’s HUA must look the same as today’s. As it prepares to elect its third pair of co-presidents, the HUA is still in its infancy. Whichever candidates secure the co-presidency should not shy away from tinkering with its structure to help it better represent the student body and respond to its needs.

Representation is a two-way street, though. Responsive, representative government requires that voters make their needs and desires clear. So, if only one word in this editorial resonates with you, let it be this: vote.

But don’t stop there. Stay engaged with student government outside just the election-season intrigue. Share your concerns about campus with an officer of the HUA or, better yet, consider volunteering for an HUA team yourself.

None of this year’s co-presidential hopefuls — or any candidate for that matter — is perfect. The last 60 years of student government politicking should make that no surprise. But perhaps more important than who you choose is that you choose at all, and that your choice doesn’t represent your last engagement with student government this year.

So please, vote your conscience and judge the candidates as best you can. Because a better student government can start with us.

This staff editorial solely represents the majority view of The Crimson Editorial Board. It is the product of discussions at regular Editorial Board meetings. In order to ensure the impartiality of our journalism, Crimson editors who choose to opine and vote at these meetings are not involved in the reporting of articles on similar topics.

Have a suggestion, question, or concern for The Crimson Editorial Board? Click here.