Preparations for the Graduate Student Association elections
““ to be held at the end of April ““ are well underway,
but not without a few minor glitches.
With the time pressures of the upcoming election and a lack of
human resources at MyUCLA, the election tabulation process used in
the past cannot be enforced this time around.
In past elections, an instant runoff voting system ““ where
voters could rank preferred candidates ““ had been implemented
as called for by GSA election bylaws in the event that more than
two candidates ran for a position.
“MyUCLA didn’t notify us that they couldn’t
handle the request until January or December. … They don’t
have the human resources to do that for this election (and) now
it’s too late to find a programmer,” said Jared Fox,
GSA president.
Though elections will still be held online through MyUCLA, a
different process, called the Borda Count, will most likely be
utilized.
Under this new tabulation process, voters still rank their
candidates, but points are assigned to each rank. For example in a
three-person race, a candidate ranked first will receive three
points, second will receive two, and third will receive one. The
highest scoring candidate will be elected.
“The Elections Board has been working with (MyUCLA) for
months to establish a fair, impartial election that expresses (the)
collective will of graduate students,” Fox said.
Issues regarding the proposed elections process for this year
raised concerns among some GSA cabinet members as GSA election odes
must be reworded to include the new method.
According to a GSA document, “the proposed change will
give the Elections Board the ability to use an alternate vote
tabulation method in the event that Instant Runoff Voting is
infeasible to implement.”
Anita Garcia, director of the legislative liaison within the GSA
Cabinet, has said she is concerned with the way the election data
will be processed.
“Basically they said they are going to take their best
guess on how to run this … (there is a) real opportunity for
fraud,” Garcia said.
Clouded with confusion on how the vote will be conducted, Garcia
said the Elections Board needs to provide cabinet members and
graduate students with a clear, solid description on how votes will
be counted that complies with GSA bylaws.
Garcia’s call for a solid description was answered at
Wednesday night’s forum meeting where members also
unanimously passed the vote to change the wording of election
bylaws to include the Borda Count as a possible voting method.
Garcia, however, was not present at the meeting.
“We have had communication problems with her in the
past,” said Marilyn Gray, GSA internal vice president
commenting on Garcia’s complaints.
Gray said she feels that, though Garcia is doing a great job in
her current position as legislative liaison, she is not very well
informed about how GSA works as an organization. “GSA was
unaware that she did not understand the discussion about the
elections methods,” Gray said.
Fox emphasized that in GSA elections, unlike Undergraduate
Students Association Council elections, it’s fairly common
for candidates to be running unopposed.
“Being a GSA officer is a large sacrifice, a thing most
graduate students are unable to do,” Fox said, reiterating
that the proposed method is not going to be a crucial change.
Now that the proposed changes for the wording of the election
code have been approved by GSA Forum, petitions for candidacy are
available at the GSA website.
Other issues under review deal with voting incentives.
In the past, voter turnout has been relatively low among
graduate students, reaching an all-time high of 17 percent in last
year’s election.
Rewarding voters with an Associated Students of UCLA store gift
certificate, free coffee coupons, and a money reward to the
academic council with the highest percentage of voter-turnout are
some of the methods that are being looked into to encourage
voting.
Garcia, who is opposed to the idea of rewarding academic
councils money, said this method provides an unequal incentive
between south campus and north campus students.
In the sciences there are less social activities as compared to
the humanities, thus providing them with a stronger incentive to
vote in order to receive money to have social events, Garcia said.
“If their goal is to increase voter turnout, they should be
using that money in the front end … they could use that money to
have candidate debates or town hall type meetings.”
Fox said that in the past their has been no interest expressed
in holding such events.
“Elections Board decides to do whatever they feel is best
for elections. Officers have no say in what Elections Board
does,” Fox said. “Generally there has not even been
enough interest for them to consider a debate being a viable
option.”
Gray emphasized that the money reward will go into the academic
council’s budget, and as long as GSA guidelines are followed,
it can be spent any way the council decides.
Also on the spring ballot will be the ASUCLA Students,
Activities, Facilities and Employees Referendum which plans to
increase student union fees slowly over the course of four
years.
Currently students pay $7.50; the referendum proposes a $12
increase per year for four consecutive years starting in 2006.
“No one likes fee increases but this is important to
ASUCLA and students,” Fox said, expressing his personal
opinion. “Unfortunately, with the other fee increases,
students are paying more and getting less (but) students will
receive full benefit from the increased fee.”