The undergraduate student government did not vote on proposed
changes to the Election Code on Tuesday night as they had planned
because of logistical concerns.
The council had intended to vote on a number of proposed
revisions to the Election Code submitted by General Representative
Brian Neesby.
Instead, the Undergraduate Students Association Council opted to
push the vote to its first meeting next quarter to give council
more time to debate the proposed changes.
The largest and most controversial of the suggestions was the
implementation of Hare voting, a proportional system in which
voters rank candidates in order of preference by a single
transferable vote.
Hare voting would eliminate traditional runoff elections,
because excess votes would be immediately redistributed among
remaining candidates according to voters’ preference
rankings.
Because there are three general representatives, that race would
be determined by single transferable voting. All other races would
be determined through instant runoff voting, a slightly modified
version of Hare voting that simply eliminates traditional
runoffs.
Some councilmembers and election officials expressed concern
about making such significant changes to election processes so
close to general elections, even if the vote had taken place
Tuesday as scheduled.
“I’m troubled about major changes coming before the
Election Board 10th week of winter quarter,” Election Board
adviser Mike Cohen said. “You’re changing the system of
voting when you have an election coming up in a few weeks. If
single transferable vote and instant runoff voting are something
you want to consider, by all means consider it. But start it in the
fall.”
The Graduate Students Association already uses Hare voting in
elections.
USAC President Jenny Wood agreed the changes should be postponed
until at least next year.
“We have an Election Board adviser and an Election Board
chair telling us that this is a bad idea right now, and
they’re the experts,” she said.
But some students said they liked the idea of the Hare voting
even though it is coming late in the year.
“I think (single transferable voting) would be better
efficiency-wise, like if you want to eliminate campaign spending
for runoffs,” said fourth-year aerospace engineering student
Chris Neely. “It doesn’t sound too
complicated.”
Fourth-year sociology student Patricia Andrade also said she
thought Hare voting could be beneficial.
“It would encourage me to vote,” she said. “It
seems in theory like a good idea because it would get rid of
runoffs. The only extra step would be ranking (the
candidates).”
Facilities Commissioner Joe Vardner said he thought most of the
students who would be most directly affected by the changes, namely
potential candidates in the spring election, were already aware of
them.
But some students worried about the effect of changing the
voting system could have on an election as a whole.
“Runoffs get people more excited and riled up,” said
Tony Quintero, a third-year political science and history
student.
Another potential problem is that Hare voting could be difficult
to implement because MyUCLA would not be able to interpret that
data and redistribute votes the way Hare voting dictates, Cohen
said.
MyUCLA would have to hand the raw data over to the Elections
Board to tabulate the results by hand, likely delaying the results.
Last year, 7,241 ballots were submitted during the general
election.
Election Board Chairwoman Anat Herzog said though it is too late
in the year to make changes like this, she does not believe they
should be abandoned.
“This needs to be set up properly for this body. Pushing
this is pretty much setting it up for failure, and I don’t
want to see that happen if it really is better for the student
body,” she said.
In addition to Hare voting, council plans to vote on definition
and clarification changes, as well as a clause that would allow
non-UCLA students to campaign on behalf of candidates.