Editorial: ASR elections present chance for reform

How should voters respond to ASR’s recent failure to increase the student activity fee? It would seem natural that the organization’s inability to follow through on a popular proposal result in voter disillusionment with the organization as a whole. Given this recent setback, one could assume that incumbent senators might face a challenge in defending their past year in ASR and advocating their reelection.

But to what extent do ASR senators deserve to be on the defensive — to what degree was the whole of ASR responsible for the student activity fee increase’s failure?

From a recent discussion with five ASR senators who will remain anonymous, the answer seems clear: the fate of the proposal that would have suggested the fee increase to the Board of Trustees was in the hands of Emmalee Bannon and Kate Fulkerson, president and vice president of ASR respectively.

One senator characterized Bannon’s failure in submitting the proposal and her recent outlook towards the issue as apathetic.

“I feel like she’s given up this year and doesn’t care anymore,� said the senator. “From last week, it seemed like she felt it was next year’s problem and she’s waiting for next year’s president to take care of it.�

Another senator said that the formulation of the proposal itself was accompanied by a lack of managerial tact.

“During the process, there was a really heavy atmosphere — there would be moments when people raised questions — is restructuring the best option? Is $20 enough? Instead of dealing with them, Emmalee said that this is the way we want it, and you have to support it.�

Many of the senators we spoke with found out about the failure of the proposal through the Trinitonian’s Feb. 18 coverage of the issue; the news about the future of the fee was not even directly shared with senators by the president when the deadline was originally missed.

The failure of top leadership in ASR is evident, both in the way it operated as an internal organization and in its external failure with the student activity fee. ASR’s senators, however, had little involvement with the proposal beyond encouraging student support of it last semester — and to punish them at the ballot box for ASR’s failure to pass the measure might have negative consequences, both practically and in principle.

“I would argue that it’s better to have someone that recognizes the obstacles in this procedure, that it’s definitely necessary to elect someone with experience of this issue,� one senator said of the upcoming elections. “To ensure a repeat of this semester, elect completely new people.�

Another senator added, “and the main people you could place the blame on for (the student activity fee issue) won’t be up for reelection this semester.�

The best action voters can take to address ASR’s lack of transparency and organizational ineptitude is to choose its top leadership wisely. These positions warrant candidates who have already demonstrated responsibility as leaders on our campus, and who can place the interests of our student body above their own.

Those who have been critical of ASR should perhaps consider joining the organization most of all — the organization needs considerable change. At the very least, such candidates could prevent another election involving unopposed candidates, which occurred with last year’s presidential election and serves only to illustrate a severe lack of engagement in student government.

The Trinitonian thus offers itself as a space for all interested parties — candidates, as well as proponents and opponents of reform — to voice their opinions about the course ASR should take. We welcome and encourage guest columns and letters to the editor that will engage the community in a much-needed civic discourse. Ultimately, the best forum for such discourse is the election that will be taking place in a few short weeks. We hope, for our benefit and the university’s as a whole, that you will take part —whether casting or receiving votes.