Spring Break
EDITORIAL: Transparency is essential for our Union to function
Editorial | 4/8/08
Posted online at 2:47 AM EST on 4/8/08
During national elections, television viewers get up-to-the-minute tallies of candidates' vote totals and find out the results of races within a few hours after voting ends if they stay up late enough. That's a far cry from round I of this spring's Brandeis Student Union elections, the results of which were revealed to this campus three days after voting ended in a disappointingly incomplete fashion.
With an online voting system, the Union has the ability to inform students of elections results almost instantaneously. And while the Union had sent out e-mails either the night of or morning after elections in previous semesters, this spring students waited by their inboxes until last Friday afternoon for that message, even though voting ended last Tuesday night. Vote tallies also weren't included in this spring's results e-mail, as they had been in previous semesters.
Open elections are among the most basic expectations placed on a government. If the Union doesn't care about students knowing how its elections turn out, students have no reason to care about voting.
This Union administration had a strong incentive to be transparent about its elections. Last year, former Secretary Mike Goldman '08 revealed or hinted at voting tallies to candidates during election periods last spring and last fall, and a 20-minute period during which the voting Web site was inaccessible marred February's Union Judiciary elections. But instead of restoring our confidence in its ability to operate clean elections, the Union has ensured that its elections remain shrouded in secrecy.
According to elections commissioner Zachary Pyle '09, those who ask the Union for vote tallies can get them. Pyle pointed out that "the e-mail to the campus is more about announcing the new officials than anything else." However, an equally important purpose of the results e-mail is for government to be transparent about the democratic process, and the Union's apathy in this area is discouraging.
Students turn out in large numbers for Union elections (43 percent of the campus voted in both the presidential and vice presidential races this year), and if candidates insist that our votes matter, we must know exactly how they ended up being relevant.
With an online voting system, the Union has the ability to inform students of elections results almost instantaneously. And while the Union had sent out e-mails either the night of or morning after elections in previous semesters, this spring students waited by their inboxes until last Friday afternoon for that message, even though voting ended last Tuesday night. Vote tallies also weren't included in this spring's results e-mail, as they had been in previous semesters.
Open elections are among the most basic expectations placed on a government. If the Union doesn't care about students knowing how its elections turn out, students have no reason to care about voting.
This Union administration had a strong incentive to be transparent about its elections. Last year, former Secretary Mike Goldman '08 revealed or hinted at voting tallies to candidates during election periods last spring and last fall, and a 20-minute period during which the voting Web site was inaccessible marred February's Union Judiciary elections. But instead of restoring our confidence in its ability to operate clean elections, the Union has ensured that its elections remain shrouded in secrecy.
According to elections commissioner Zachary Pyle '09, those who ask the Union for vote tallies can get them. Pyle pointed out that "the e-mail to the campus is more about announcing the new officials than anything else." However, an equally important purpose of the results e-mail is for government to be transparent about the democratic process, and the Union's apathy in this area is discouraging.
Students turn out in large numbers for Union elections (43 percent of the campus voted in both the presidential and vice presidential races this year), and if candidates insist that our votes matter, we must know exactly how they ended up being relevant.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 8
Zachary Pyle
posted 4/08/08 @ 12:41 PM EST
The irony here of course is that hours before I explained to the Justice that the email to the campus would only have winners I had sent an email providing all vote tallies and percentages requested to a Justice reporter. (Continued…)
Bob Jones
posted 4/09/08 @ 11:29 AM EST
Okay: WHY is there no contact information on the Justice home page? http://www.thejusticeonline.com/ Why is there no search engine? Why is there no link to archived stories? Why is the Justice site so pathetic?
John
posted 4/10/08 @ 2:24 AM EST
It's not so bad article but I thought that I find some more details.
-----------
In free time please visit my site:
http://testyiq.ovh.org/index_en. (Continued…)
blah
posted 4/15/08 @ 1:58 AM EST
blah
Post a Comment