Benjamin Franklin never ran for Undergraduate Students
Association Council president, but that never stopped candidates
from looking to his flat, green face for help.
With the primary election for USAC in the books, candidates were
required to release their expenditures for campaign spending.
From the final report, Bruins United candidates spent a
considerable amount more on their campaign than any of the other
slates, both during the primaries and for the current runoff
election.
From the beginning of the election, candidates were invited to
sign on to a voluntary spending cap pledge, which limits spending
to $600 for the presidential candidates and $400 for other
candidates.
During an orientation meeting for the USAC elections, several
candidates signed onto the spending cap. These included all members
of Student Power!, Future Front, all independent candidates and two
candidates from Bruins United. Both Bruins United candidates later
rescinded their signatures from the spending cap.
In expenses, Alex Gruenberg, the Bruins United candidate for
president, spent a total of $1,534 between both the primaries and
run-offs, as compared to $545.75 spent by Jenny Wood, Student
Power! candidate for president.
For various campaign materials, costs varied. Bruins United
candidates were each listed as spending $579 on fliers, whereas
Student Power! candidates were each listed as spending $102. Future
Front candidates spent $87.50 each on fliers. No members of the
Bruin Liberation Movement spent funds on fliers.
Several unopposed candidates had no campaign expenses, including
independent candidates Jason Kaminsky and Tracy Pham.
“The spending cap is a good idea to make sure that the
election process is more equitable for everyone because we want to
make sure that working-class students have a chance in making it to
the council table,” said Tommy Tseng, who ran for election to
the internal vice presidency.
Zoe Loftus-Farren, Future Front candidate for general
representative, said that Future Front had a very low budget, and
that a spending cap might be more beneficial if more people signed
on to it.
“It levels the playing field,” Loftus-Farren
said.
Some expressed concern that spending was misrepresented because
of rules on reporting expenditures outlined by the Elections
Code.
“The way they do it right now, the campaign expense
accounts inflates the numbers of parties,” said Bruins
United’s Brian Neesby, one of next year’s general
representatives. Neesby said that some purchases can be split among
slate candidates, but the documentation of the purchase may not
reflect this.
According to the Election Code, if a slate makes a purchase that
each candidate in the slate pays for, each candidate must list the
total price of the purchase on their spending accounts. Neesby said
an example was how, even though each candidate paid only a ninth of
the cost for fliers, each one had to report the total cost on their
accounts.
Some unopposed candidates, who had no need to worry about their
election, focused on publicizing other causes, rather than their
campaign.
“Since I was unopposed, I would rather spend the money on
advocating my projects. … (I provided) for the Community Service
Commission, not me,” said next year’s Community Service
Commissioner Farheen Malik.
The spending account records are available for review in the
USAC Elections Board office in Kerckhoff Hall 312.