Campaign spending caps became optional for Undergraduate
Students Association Council candidates in 2003, but this election
marks the first year no slate’s candidates opted to sign
on.
The voluntary spending cap, which limits how much money can be
spent on a single campaign, ranges from $400 for commissioners to
$600 for presidential candidates for the primary election.
Candidates from one slate ““ a coalition of students with
similar ideologies and goals, similar to political parties ““
usually decide as a group whether to abide by the cap.
With the flexibility to raise and spend more money, candidates
from all three slates, as well as some independents, said they were
soliciting donations from family and friends as their primary
source of funding.
“We ask for donations from the people who support us and
know us, and that usually suffices,” said Jeannie Biniek,
campaign manager for Students First! and the current external vice
president. The slate is handling fundraising for all its
candidates.
Students First!, known last year as Student Power!, has
historically signed on to the cap as a matter of principle.
Last year, then-presidential candidate Jenny Wood told the Daily
Bruin the cap was important because it prevented discrimination
against a candidate based on his or her economic status.
But this year, Students First! did not sign the cap for
practical reasons.
Second-year sociology student Gregory Cendana, the Students
First! candidate for internal vice president, said Students First!
will only purchase sweatshop-free T-shirts and campaign materials
this year, which tend to be more expensive.
Neither Bruins United nor Slate Refund ““ the other two
slates running ““ agreed to the voluntary cap, though each
slate cited different reasoning behind that decision.
Slate Refund, a newcomer to undergraduate elections, did not
sign the cap because they were not familiar enough with the
elections process to know how it would affect them, said
presidential candidate and former Daily Bruin columnist Garin
Hovannisian, a third-year history student.
Bruins United, for the second year in a row, opted not to sign
the cap.
Nat Schuster, Bruins United candidate for Academic Affairs
commissioner and a third-year neuroscience student, said he did not
think his slate’s refusal to sign the cap would translate to
exorbitant spending.
“We want to be competitive, but we’re all students
and no one wants to be spending more than they have to,” he
said.
Self-reported campaign expenses will be reported next week, but
many candidates said they were not yet sure how much money they
would be spending, as campaigning does not officially begin until
Thursday.
Though candidates typically spend a few hundred dollars on their
campaigns, expenses have occasionally been much higher. Doug Ludlow
spent over $2,000 during his unsuccessful 2004 campaign for the
presidency.
Only a handful of independent candidates agreed to abide by the
voluntary spending cap, and some said having no slates sign on to
the cap would make campaigning as an independent more
difficult.
Slate candidates are generally viewed as having an advantage in
publicity over independents, whether or not they choose to limit
their spending.
“It definitely affects how I’m going to go about my
campaign, since I’m running against someone on a slate and
they’ll probably have more resources than me,” said
Dorothy Le, a fourth-year geography and environmental studies
student and an independent candidate for Facilities commissioner.
“I’ll have to strategize and get more people
power.”
Cendana said the slates’ refusal to sign the cap might
change campaigning to some extent.
“There will just be people trying to find more creative
ways to get their names out there (since they will have more
financial flexibility),” he said.Read tomorrow’s
Daily Bruin for extended profiles of USAC’s presidential
candidates.