From misplacing signboards to handing out fliers lacking
official stamps of approval, candidates running for the
undergraduate student government may have violated the Elections
Code in a number of ways during primary elections last week.
During these elections, candidates received penalties for
breaking such campaign restrictions as handing out fliers in the
dorms, turning in late or incomplete expense accounts, and
distributing unstamped materials, said Roy Samaan, chairman of the
Elections Board.
The restrictions set out by the Elections Code are meant to
ensure that no candidate has an unfair advantage in the campaign,
Samaan said.
But some students running for office asserted that rather than
making for a fair election, the sanctions prevented candidates from
campaigning successfully.
“With so many sanctions, it was really hindering the
ability to campaign,” said Alex Gruenberg, the newly elected
Financial Supports commissioner and member of the Equal Access
Coalition.
As the stakes increase during the runoff elections, the
penalties for violations of the Elections Code will become more
strict as well, Samaan said.
“We think it’s going to be a really intense week for
candidates, so we want to make sure that all candidates are on the
same page,” Samaan said.
Students running under the Equal Access Coalition received more
sanctions than either Students First! or independent candidates,
Samaan said, adding that sanctions were imposed on those who handed
out unstamped fliers, set up an illegal campaign post to play a
movie, and failed to submit complete expense reports.
Gruenberg attributed the disproportionate amount of sanctions
against students on his slate to unnecessary technicalities within
the E-Code and the desire of some opposition candidates to go out
of their way to find and report violations.
But Samaan pointed to the long history of Students First! as the
most likely reason the slate’s candidates received fewer
sanctions. As an older slate, Students First! has had several years
to learn how to conduct an effective and legal campaign.
Gruenberg said the sanctions those on his slate received were
the results of honest mistakes rather than intentions to circumvent
the Elections Code.
Candidates running with Students First! also received a sanction
that they do not believe was within their control ““ Students
First! candidates handed out fliers that did not appear to have
been stamped and approved by the E-Board.
But presidential candidate Allende Palma/Saracho said that this
sanction was due to the material of the fliers, which caused the
stamp to rub off before the fliers were handed out.
Samaan also said he believed most candidates did not set out to
break rules, adding that the E-Board did not issue strict sanctions
for candidates’ misunderstandings.
Some candidates who were sanctioned echoed a similar sentiment,
saying that problems with possible violations were due to
misunderstandings or factors that were not within their
control.
During the primary elections, the sanctions that were issued due
to these kinds of mistakes and misunderstandings were fairly
lenient, but candidates will have less room for error in the
runoffs this week, Samaan said.
“Now that candidates have been campaigning for a week, we
are going to expect them to know what they can and can’t do.
… We expect it to be at a higher standard,” he said.