Student Assembly

« Relationship with the Administration | 2008Spring | Public Relations »

This page contains comments posted by members of the Cornell community pertaining to Elections in the Student Assembly. Before posting to this forum, please read the comments below to make sure that the information you are providing is pertinent to the discussion. Comments are especially valuable if they add new information or points of view.

Initial Findings

Resolution 12, calling for the direct election of the Student Assembly President and Executive Vice President, moved the Student Assembly closer to a direct democracy. It was very well received by the undergraduate community and demonstrated that the Student Assembly is committed to self-improvement. It is essential, however, that Resolution 12 be responsibly implemented. New officers must be trained by their predecessors and there must be some kind of a turnover document that new officers receive. The Office of the Assemblies can play a role in ensuring that directly elected officers are prepared to assume their responsibilities.

Despite some considerable steps forward, the undergraduate community remains indifferent with regard to the annual Student Assembly elections. Some feel that those who are already involved on the Student Assembly will be the only ones running, and that getting elected in a crowded contest presents a huge hill to climb.

In light of the Student Assembly’s most recent elections, outright disqualification from an election has seriously hurt the system. When too few candidates are running, and an additional candidate is disqualified for a rules violation, seats remain vacant into the fall semester of the following year. This requires a costly and time consuming special election. While tickets brought a huge number of candidates into the elections process, the quality and enthusiasm of the candidates was often less than desirable. The tickets system led to corruption and ‘political bosses,’ and while we long for more candidates, we must do so by stepping forward and remembering our past mistakes.

The Student Assembly must commit itself to publicizing its elections, and while Resolution 12 is likely to begin a debate about serious issues that require our attention, there is much more still required. The Student Assembly must recruit the most qualified and most motivated students to serve as representatives. The Student Assembly must receive a voter turn-out that is greater than the current 10% if its elections are to accurately account for student sentiment. A successful elections season with high voter turnout will provide huge momentum for the incoming Student Assembly to leverage for its upcoming term.

The Student Assembly elections process is currently very costly, eating up tens of thousands of dollars from the Student Activity Fee for purpose of contracting an online polling application.

Potential Solutions

1. Freshman elections should be publicized with a recruitment letter in new student welcome packets from the Student Assembly President. A pre-addressed postcard should be inserted, too, that a student can use to express interest in the upcoming election.
2. Recruitment for the general elections should be ongoing, and candidates should be permitted to check-out an elections packet from the first day of the spring semester. This will provide ample time and opportunities to compile the necessary documents, and word of the election will spread quickly throughout campus.
3. Recruitment letters should be sent to all college deans, department chairs, and the dean of students office, requesting that they encourage their favorite students run for the Student Assembly. A student is more likely to try something new, if they receive a personal appeal from a respected mentor. Letters should also be sent to the presidents of all SAO organizations and byline funded groups, encouraging them to submit the name of a group member to run for the Student Assembly. These organizations rely upon the Student Assembly to provide the vast majority of its funding, and they would likely want a voice in the upcoming funding cycle.
4. The Student Assembly President and Executive Vice President should be permitted to run as a team, and a set of guidelines for their election should be created to account for complications that may occur.
5. The Student Assembly should evaluate less costly means for conducting elections (i.e. privately-managed elections software, a Facebook application, etc.)

Community Comments

Add a Comment

Please provide your full name and netid in the author box. If you wish to leave an anonymous comment, please put “Anonymous” in the author box.

Example: John Smith jds334

Example: Anonymous

Add Comment
Sign as Author
Enter code:

« Relationship with the Administration | 2008Spring | Public Relations »