Two years ago, the Graduate Students Association elections saw the largest turnout ever ““ 22.77 percent. Just a year later, not much more than half that percentage was recorded, as only 15.93 percent logged on to vote.
If that does not send up a big red flag for this year’s field of candidates, it’s hard to say what would.
With 2006 in mind, this year’s candidates need to address the issue of student interest in GSA, in both elections and general activities.
Whether graduate students realize it or not, GSA is important.
The association plays a pivotal part in representing graduate students’ interests in myriad campus decision-making groups, including the Academic Senate and the Associated Students UCLA board of directors, just to name a few, as well as many advisory committees. By voting in GSA elections, students are indirectly choosing which opinions will be represented.
GSA manages a portion of student fees and allocates funds to graduate student groups. It serves as the primary advocate for graduate students within UCLA as well as in the greater University of California community.
Unfortunately, based on the turnout from last year’s elections, it seems that not many graduates understand the role GSA plays. There is little concept of GSA’s impact on the student population ““ at least the impact which it could have with more involvement and interaction from students.
With all this in mind, this year is key for those candidates seeking positions on next year’s graduate student government.
It is imperative that candidates find a way to engage students. They need to promote themselves and their ideas in an attempt to solicit genuine feedback and to further evolve those ideas for the good of the graduate and professional student community.
GSA also needs to look ahead to next year’s elections in order to make important changes aimed at encouraging more student involvement and interest in their activities.
The association also needs to find a way to solicit more candidates for election. This year’s field is composed of five candidates, of which only two are competing for the presidency. The other three are virtually guaranteed election to their respective vice presidential positions because they are running unopposed. This utter lack of competition poses a problem.
Without competition, there is a dearth of discussion about the various issues facing graduate students. There is a lack of ideas for solutions to graduate student problems.
Additionally, the absence of discussion and competition removes the motivation for candidates to widely publicize their ideas, or even to the extent which they would if presented with a situation where engagement with another candidate’s ideas or proposals is necessary.
Of course, it would be easy to ask graduate students to be more interested and involved in the activities of their elected officials. But at the same time, it is unreasonable to expect students to be interested in a process of representation from which they feel disconnected.
If used well, the graduate student government could have a significant impact on the lives of graduate students.
But when its candidates fail to engage students in a more productive manner, it should be no surprise if the election sees another drop in voter turnout.
CORRECTION: This story had incorrectly stated that the turnout for GSA elections in 2005 was 27.77 percent.