The Graduate Student Association elections took an unexpected
turn as several candidates from the Graduates Representing
Educating Advocating Transforming slate filed complaints against
the elections board on April 26.
Representatives of GREAT issued a statement Tuesday expressing
dissatisfaction with several actions taken recently by the
elections board.
Complaints were levied against the board’s decision to
edit several candidate statements, the posting of a link on the
official GSA elections Web site to incumbent presidential candidate
Jared Fox’s personal Web site, changes in the endorsement
process and a disparaging e-mail against GREAT presidential
candidate Anita Garcia.
“I am disappointed in both GSA and Jared,” Garcia
said. “Everything they have done has put us at a huge
disadvantage. To call it a fair election is a misuse of the term
“˜fair.'”
In the April 19 elections board meeting, the board, which is
comprised of representatives from the 13 councils, edited three
GREAT and two independent candidates’ statements for
containing disparaging comments.
According to the GSA elections code, candidates can only include
comments which are factual and non-defamatory or disparaging in
their statements.
The changes were based on an earlier decision at the meeting to
make the code apply to comments toward GSA in addition to the GSA
candidates.
None of the GSA Experience candidates, the opposing slate, had
their statements edited. Fox, running under GSA Experience, was
present at the meeting when the decision was made.
Natalie Stites, a GREAT campaigning manager, said the edited
statements were posted on the official Web site without notice, and
an e-mail was sent to affected candidates only after the fact.
Stites also questioned Fox’s presence at the elections board
meeting.
“They are expressing clear preferences for this election
by not editing GSA Experience candidates,” Stites said,
emphasizing that GREAT candidates were not told they could attend
the elections board meeting.
Fox said the elections board’s decision to censor the
statements arose from the way the statements were worded, which
portrayed the current GSA negatively and were thus classified as
“disparaging.”
Stites said in a statement “no individual, candidate or
organization was identified as being disparaged by the censored
statements, nor any complaint filed.”
Though Stites and Garcia said they were unaware of the meeting,
all election board meetings are open to the public, and the date
for this particular meeting had been announced at the candidate
orientation session.
Another complaint GREAT filed deals with an e-mail distributed
to the School of Public Policy by one of Fox’s campaign
supporters, Hasmik Badalian, criticizing Garcia’s past
service.
“Jared should be disqualified because (Badalian) sent an
e-mail disparaging Anita Garcia personally ““ what (Badalian)
did is disparaging,” Stites said.
Fox was unaware that such an e-mail with content against Garcia
had been distributed and said the e-mail had been sent before
Badalian had begun campaigning for him.
“I will not say anything negative about anyone and I
don’t tell people to say anything negative in this
campaign,” Fox said.
Since learning of the e-mail, Fox has removed Badalian’s
supporting statement from his Web site and has asked the elections
board to remove her endorsement from the ballot, he said. Fox also
said he does not agree with Badalian’s comments.
Appearing on the official GSA elections Web site is also a
direct link to Fox and the GSA Experience slate’s Web site,
but no other candidate has a direct link, Stites said.
“We were not informed that we could include the link in
the statement,” Garcia said.
However, Golnaz Tabibnia, director of elections, said the
elections board sent an e-mail on April 15 letting candidates know
such an option was available.
The elections board has not reached a decision on any of the
complaints.