The Undergraduate Students Association Council plans to vote
Tuesday on proposed revisions to the Election Code, one of which
would implement a new voting system designed to eliminate runoff
elections.
The Election Code outlines rules and processes for
elections.
If the proposed changes are passed on Tuesday, they will apply
to the upcoming general election in spring quarter.
USAC General Representative Brian Neesby suggested a number of
changes to the Election Code last week, most of which were
clarification and definition changes.
Neesby also proposed implementing the Hare system of voting, a
proportional representation system in which voters would rank
candidates in order of preference by a single transferable
vote.
Because votes are redistributed automatically, traditional
runoff elections are replaced by instant runoffs.
Neesby said the new system will be more representative than the
current voting process.
“It has implications especially for the general
representatives,” he said. “It will be impossible for
one party to gain all three seats, as we did this year. It’s
foolish for Bruins United or Student Power! to think that we
represent 100 percent of campus. We don’t.”
Some councilmembers have repeatedly expressed concerns about the
merits of the Hare voting system.
USAC President Jenny Wood said eliminating traditional runoff
elections could be detrimental because voters would not have the
extra time to consider their positions on the issues.
“I just don’t understand why you would want to
eliminate dialogue on important issues,” she said.
Election Board Chairwoman Anat Herzog said she was also worried
that instant runoffs could make the final results of elections less
reflective of the will of the student body.
“When you eliminate runoffs, you eliminate a chance for
(students) to change their minds,” she said.
“Right now, students can change their minds based on
who’s already in office.
“The more time you give people to consider their
decisions, the more accurate the results of the election will
be.”
Normally, members of the Election Board are the only ones to
propose changes to the Election Code, but councilmembers may do so
as well. The changes only require a simple majority of council to
pass.
Herzog also expressed concern that implementing Hare voting now
could decrease voter turnout because voters will not have had
enough time to fully understand the new system.
“Doing it so late in the year is probably going to be very
confusing,” she said.
“I think that on some level it will decrease voter
turnout, because people will be confused when they get to the
computer.”
But Neesby said that Hare voting has practical advantages as
well.
“By not having runoff elections, you save $6,000 a year
that can then go back to student groups, or to better
campaigning,” he said.
Neesby first introduced Hare voting as part of the senate
proposal, which aims to change the structure of student government
in addition to the voting system.
Council voted against the proposal in January, but Neesby has
said he will try to get the senate system approved through a
referendum.
He said he will leave Hare voting in the Senate proposal in
addition to the current Election Code proposal, because if it is
passed through a referendum, it becomes a bylaw, which is more
difficult to change than the Election Code.
“We’ll definitely still leave it on the Senate
proposal,” he said.
“We don’t want to do all this work just to have it
get changed again next year (by a revision of the Election
Code).”
With the spring general election approaching, Neesby does not
have a lot of time to pass the Senate proposal through a referendum
this year, especially since the proposal would influence how votes
are counted in that election.
Herzog said she hopes all changes are finalized by Tuesday so
that the election goes as smoothly as possible.