Editorial
Planning on Controversy

day’s ASUC senate meeting, this shouldn’t obscure the problems that have surrounded her ascension—problems that bode poorly for hopes of an orderly election.

With so much controversy surrounding the election last April (and elections in most years in recent memory, for that matter), the chair nomination should have been a bigger priority on the ASUC agenda. The obstacles that held up the process were foreseeable.

The issue of graduate student involvement in the selection process, which is cited as the primary reason for the delay, could have been addressed in advance. Requirements passed last year mandating graduate students take part in the Elections Council formation were clearly well intentioned. But officials should have accounted for the rush of work that can overwhelm grad students. Allowing them to voluntarily abdicate their responsibility in cases of too much work would be an easy solution.

Now the ASUC is eight weeks behind in the elections process. The lost time could have been used to clarify and simplify rules about something like chalking that produced so much controversy last time around. If current senators need any reminder of the problems associated with this time of year, they need only be reminded of the controversy over ASUC Senate Bill 51, which reached its climax at almost the exact same time as the senate was due to select Elections Council nominees.

Choosing Wren was the best possible decision the senate could have made. She held the position last year and, with an eight-week holdup, experience counts for a lot. But the fact is, elections occupy such a big part of the ASUC’s spring semester that the issues holding up her nomination should have been given greater priority. Now, not only do they have to prove themselves to students, they’ve got to do it quickly.

Tags: