Election code reform should be separate from political interests.
In response to the article “USAC divided on election code reform,” regardless of my position on the election board’s proposal, or David Bocarsly’s proposal, I believe it is not the responsibility of current Undergraduate Students Association Council members to be so involved in finding a particular solution to the election code reform issue.
The issue of reform is inherently political and partisan, and the groups which stand to gain or lose the most from its change should not make the final decision on what proposal will be adopted.
The election board chair, Dana Pede, was appointed because she is unaffiliated with any slate. The neutrality of the election board, as well as their deep understanding and insight into the issues of the elections process, uniquely qualifies them to make the best decision for our campus.
I am not advocating for any particular solution, but I do think the process of creating and adopting new policy should be led by unbiased, unaffiliated students who can make judgment without the implication of conflict of personal or political interest.
Taylor Bazley
Third-year, political science student and co-chairman of True Bruin
Claiming that any individual contains no bias is in itself a baseless claim. Everyone has their own bias. No one individual contains a nonpartisan means to achieving a goal of nonpartisanship. Power ultimately corrupts and bestowing further power and regulation amongst an election board that has a history to be corrupt will only complicate things further. Why do “official” endorsements have to be limited to only registered student groups on campus? Why cannot my unregistered circle of friends who play video games in the dorms become an official endorser of a candidate? We certainly have our opinions, but if we are not an official organization recognized by election board we do not have an official voice in the matters at hand. Election board is corrupt any way you want to slice it.