Nearly every UCLA student government election sees election code violations punished inadequately or not punished at all.
Just as they did last year, candidates from the Undergraduate Students Association Council slates LET’S ACT! and Bruins United posted photos on personal social media accounts weeks before the approved start date for online campaigning. The candidates have been doing a good deal of self-promotion without explicitly stating they are running for office, a part of either slate or soliciting votes.
The Election Board needs to exercise its power and put an end to an annual violation that has become a USAC tradition by barring LET’S ACT! and Bruins United from campaigning online until April 23, three days after online campaigning officially begins.
It’s obvious what these two slates are doing and it’s doubtful that these candidates think they’re fooling anyone. But they are successfully defying the election calendar.
The election calendar, which each candidate receives a copy of upon applying to run, states that online campaigning begins at noon on April 20. It could be argued that, because their candidacy and slate affiliation is not explicitly stated on the social media posts, the candidates did not commit a punishable offense.
The Election Code, however, implies that the Election Board can take action against the LET’S ACT! and Bruins United slates.
According to the code, “the Election Board Investigations Committee shall determine whether or not a violation occurs via social media posts.” The board definitely has “probable cause to determine that the slate was associated” with the violation; there is no excuse for it not to act.
Late last month, the Election Board deemed FIRED UP!, another USAC slate, ineligible to run candidates after it turned in its application seven minutes past the deadline. This kind of rigidity and strict adherence to the rules is a welcome sign, but it means nothing if it comes without consistency.
Letting LET’S ACT! and Bruins United candidates get off unpunished with underhanded online campaigning after disqualifying a whole slate because it was seven minutes late is not only unfair to FIRED UP!, it sets a strange and confusing precedent. Should a similar situation arise next year, the Election Board should ban the slates or candidates from online campaigning until the voting period begins.
The Election Board has done well thus far leading up to the election cycle; it deserves credit for implementing mandatory campaign spending limits and disclosure of funding sources for the first time following a relatively large-scale scandal. While punishing slates for something less scandalous like social media posts may not seem as glamorous, it is still necessary to maintain a fair election.
If it doesn’t sanction LET’S ACT! or Bruins United at all, this year’s Election Board risks going from a body that has advocated for fairness and democracy to one that is disappointingly inconsistent.
That’s funny because look at the mudslinging Lets Act candidates were doing on facebook, explicitly tagging Bruin United candidates