CalSERVE Senator Wendy Pacheco introduced the bill Sept. 25 to address cultural insensitivity on campus after the campus fraternity Delta Chi hosted a quinceanera-themed party Sept. 21.

The bill, SB 16, was discussed at Monday’s external committee meeting, where members of both the multicultural and Greek communities gathered to discuss concerns about Delta Chi’s party.

Many members of the campus Latino community said at the meeting that they were upset by party’s theme, which they claimed appropriated Latino culture and mocked Mexican traditions. Members of the Greek community at the committee meeting recognized the concerns about Delta Chi’s behavior.

The bill was amended significantly during the committee meeting after students in the Greek community raised concerns about what they said was harsh language in the bill. Student Action Senator Lauren Week, who is in a sorority, said she felt she was “being attacked” by the language of the bill.

Interfraternity Council President Andrey Kisel also emphasized at the meeting that the bill’s language was especially harsh toward the Greek community.

The amended version of the bill was altered to reflect these concerns and notes that “this incident (at Delta Chi) is not reflective of the individual sentiment of each individual in the Greek community.”

The bill’s title was changed from “A Bill to Censure the Inter-Fraternity Council (IFC) for the Appropriate of Latin@/Xican@ Culture” to “A Bill Condemning the Negligence of Cultural Awareness within the Inter-Fraternity Council (IFC).”

The amended bill addresses more specifically what the ASUC believes it and the Greek community should do to make the Greek community a more “culturally aware body.” According to the bill, Delta Chi will be asked to write a public apology to the Xican@ and Latin@ community, and “cultural awareness training (will) be urged by ASUC for all student organizations on campus.”

The bill calls for the implementation of additional training programs and provisions within the Greek community to increase cultural sensitivity as well as communication and collaboration between the IFC and the UC Berkeley LEAD Center to raise cultural awareness.

“This bill is not about communities of color versus the greek community,” Pacheco said in a statement. “Instead this is the start of a conversation and hopefully a partnership between both communities to not only address the issue at hand but also to create a safe campus environment for everyone.”

Kisel echoed Pacheco’s sentiment that both communities should work together to address the incident at Delta Chi.

“(We) agree that what happened is major issue,” Kisel said. “We don’t want this to be a battle between any two communities.”

After a short senate meeting Wednesday, SB 16 passed without discussion.

“I wasn’t that surprised that it passed, only because there had been a considerable amount of working together with the Greek community and the senators that represent (it),” Pacheco said after the meeting.

Jennie Yoon is the lead student government reporter. Contact her at jyoon@dailycal.org and follow her on Twitter @jennieyoon_.

The post ASUC Senate passes bill condemning cultural insensitivity in Greek community appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Danielle Shi/Staff

Several misunderstandings in a recent op-ed on Nolan Pack’s ASUC Senate performance and the role of the Office of the Executive Vice President have forced us to leave our happy retirement as former ASUC officials and once again address The Daily Californian. Drawing from our experiences working with Pack during our 2012-13 senate term, we want to correct our colleagues’ portrayal of him and clarify the role of the executive vice president’s office to dispel any further misinterpretations of that office.

 In the op-ed by two of our senate colleagues, former Senators Deo and Hua, Pack was described as both “one of the most polarizing figures while he served as Senator” as well as “disrespectful to his fellow Senators who opposed his opinions.” In our experience as a Student Action senator and a Cooperative Movement senator, we have worked across party lines and have had the engaging experience of being on the opposite side of Pack’s opinion. Based on our experiences, we think our colleagues’ depiction of Pack’s character couldn’t be further from the truth.

Pack was the most productive and talented critical thinker in our senate class. He pushed the boundaries of our senate and provoked members to think intellectually. Our senate colleagues must not have been present at the meetings when Pack created the Student Environmental Resource Center, helped spearhead the fossil fuel divestment movement here at UC Berkeley, organized queer town halls and created the first campuswide queer newsletter. They must have been elsewhere when Pack stood up for human rights when it came to the issue of divesting from companies that profit from and facilitate Israeli human rights violations in occupied Palestine, when he led structural and administrative reform for the ASUC and when he wrote more than 30 successful senate bills — many of which have gained national attention and none of which failed.

 There is a saying that “success comes from compromise,” and we have seen many senate projects and bills fail over the years simply because ASUC officials failed to keep this concept in mind.

Contrary to what last week’s op-ed suggested, much of Pack’s success developed through his willingness to compromise. After simultaneously serving in the environmental, queer and transfer-student community, Pack has gained a healthy focus on collaboration and getting substantive work done. He continues to have great working relationships with members of all the ASUC parties as well as many campus organizations, leaders and students. Pack’s success could not have been possible without his talent for compromise, the approval of the senate we have all served on or our experience working across party lines, and Pack’s track record as the most productive senator of our term can attest to that.

 As for the role of the executive vice president — contrary to the vision of the neutral legislative chair preached in our senate colleagues’ op-ed — the office is deliberately designed to be political and non-neutral. Overlooking the definition of the EVP’s office in the ASUC Constitution, our colleagues reduced its “main role … to facilitat(ing) ASUC Senate discussion and maintain(ing) respect for all opinions in the chambers.” They must have overlooked Article 2, Section 3 of the ASUC Constitution, which states that in addition to serving “as the chairperson of the ASUC senate,” the EVP must also “vote to break a tie vote of the ASUC senate.” This section further expands the office of the EVP, identifying its primary role as “serv(ing) as the second-ranking representative of the Association,” responsible for “ensur(ing) that actions directed by the senate are performed.” Chairing the senate is clearly only part of the role, and one must recognize that the EVP’s office is institutionally designed by the ASUC Constitution to be a political, and by evidence of its vote-making responsibility, non-neutral office.

Pack was elected for his leadership on many issues as well as for his ability to advocate student interests and ensure that all voices in our diverse student community are heard. His job is to keep all the ASUC officials — senate, judicial and executive — transparent and accountable to the student community. This myth of neutrality is false, unsubstantiated and indeed directly contradicted by the ASUC’s legal documents. The EVP is supposed to break ties on senate votes and should be just as opinionated as every other legislative chair in the ASUC. All legislative chairs enter office with an agenda; they each aim to represent and serve the communities that elected them in. This myth that the EVP must be a neutral legislative chair must be put to rest.

 As for our colleagues’ prophesy that Pack will be “the main catalyst for what looks to be the most ineffective and contentious ASUC that this school has ever seen,” we would like to remind our colleagues that our student government is 131 years old and that Pack has only chaired three meetings so far. We don’t think that one of the most hardworking and devoted public servants to our university will usher in a dark age in the 131-year history of the ASUC like they foretell, especially so early in the semester. We give more credit to this year’s senate class and trust their ability to effectively maintain and utilize this institution — representing arguably the most influential student body in the nation — and have faith that this senate class will outshine the last under Pack’s leadership.

 Lastly, we would like to reiterate that as former ASUC officials, we were initially extremely reluctant to write an op-ed in The Daily Californian and only did so in response to the inflammatory allegations made by our senate colleagues. We recognize that former ASUC officials are former ASUC officials and that they should, with dignity, move on with their lives.

The post Beyond party lines appeared first on The Daily Californian.

This Friday marks about two weeks since the end of one of the most historic ASUC elections in our time at Cal. Finally, our student government leaders are back in class, political opponents are hanging out together at Taco Tuesday and exhausted candidates (including myself) have been rejuvenated by that almost mystical Cal Day energy. ASUC life feels back to normal. But before our newly elected class of ASUC officials takes the reins and the entire election cycle begins again, we have a little reflecting to do. The questions must be asked: How can we consciously learn from the results of this historic election to improve our student government? Where do we go from here?

In my eyes, the answer lies in a respect for party differences and increased collaboration both inside and outside the senate chambers. This year’s senate class achieved many notable (even tripartisan) accomplishments; however, it would be naive to ignore the countless times party egos, power struggles and bloc voting inhibited a productive and inclusive conversation and marginalized communities lacking political power. I firmly believe that next year’s class can do better if they read between the lines of the election results and see that this year’s elections were not simply a victory for CalSERVE or a loss for Student Action. This year’s elections were a wake-up call to our entire student government that elected officials should stand for something more than just a party; the ASUC must represent the under-represented, and parties should focus less on the political game and more on the political collaboration that drives tangible results for students.

A record voter turnout, a mixed-party executive cabinet, and a senate in which no major party holds a majority demonstrate that our student body is ready to move beyond pure party politics. Party and community collaboration will not be easy, but to be successful, the incoming executives and senators from all parties must be willing to proactively work with other parties and communities to accomplish their legislative and advocacy goals.

As SQUELCH!’s candidate for ASUC president, I strived to demonstrate my enthusiasm for cross-community collaboration. If elected, I wanted all students on this campus to know my door was open to them regardless of their party and that I was willing to learn about the issues impacting their communities. From the very start of my campaign, I made it a priority to reach beyond my own communities by participating in multiple town halls, meeting with various community leaders and making my campaign an opportunity to learn about the issues facing all communities at Cal, regardless of the parties they traditionally affiliate with. Despite my narrow loss of the ASUC presidential race, I think SQUELCH!’s efforts to change the discourse regarding Cal’s party politics impacted this year’s election for the better. But this impact will only lead to tangible positive change if our newly elected ASUC officials respond with action to the campus’s call for collaboration.

This cross-party collaboration can take on many different forms. For example, elected officials can increase the number of projects that bring communities together, such as the ASUC Perspectives Showcase, and co-author more legislation. They can work together to create and institutionalize a nonpartisan, multicommunity/organization advisory council to the ASUC. And, most importantly, they can simply ensure that senators have mutual respect for one another during contentious conversations. None of this will be possible until all of the involved parties respect each other’s work and recognize the importance of what they each uniquely contribute to the campus and their respective communities.

Furthermore, increased party collaboration opens up new opportunities for senators and executives to engage directly with communities that are not their own – to build partnerships between constituencies traditionally represented by different parties. And, by doing so, commit to making this university a smaller, more closely knit campus. Next year’s leaders should and must seize this moment.

The bottom line is that Cal’s political parties are not going anywhere, and all of them deserve a seat at the table. While Student Action can’t possibly represent “every student, every year,” it does represent thousands of students, holds 10 out of 25 elected positions and has demonstrated strong leadership over the last few years. CalSERVE may be strictly beholden to a progressive political ideology that excludes some students, but the coalition work it does hold our administration and lawmakers accountable to the diverse community that makes Cal the No. 1 public university in the world.  And, despite much speculation, SQUELCH! is not trying to “squelch” the big parties. Instead, we strive to provide a third-party perspective to the often two-party-dominated ASUC conversation to remind our student leaders that their responsibility lies with the student body, not a party, and to stand for a more productive ASUC. If we can finally accept that a truly representative ASUC is one that incorporates a combination of Student Action, CalSERVE, SQUELCH! and independents, then we can establish a respectful relationship that allows for a more collaborative and productive ASUC.

The composition of next year’s ASUC is not an accident. The incoming elected officials have a responsibility to recognize that they have been given a unique position to foster a drastically more collaborative and less partisan ASUC that can more effectively serve the entire student body. The rhetoric of one party or one community’s political domination at the expense of another is simply counterproductive and must end. During one of the most pivotal moments in the history of higher education – especially in the history of this institution – now more than ever is the time to come together, realize that we all share a passion for this campus and serving our communities, and do the work we were elected to do.

Jason Bellet is an ASUC senator with the SQUELCH! party.

Contact the opinion desk at opinion@dailycal.org or follow us on Twitter: @dailycalopinion.

The post With ASUC elections over, what comes next? appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Former external affairs vice president Joey Freeman and former SQUELCH! senator Noah Ickowitz, a former columnist for The Daily Californian, have jointly filed charges alleging that the ASUC Senate violated the ASUC Constitution in its passage of SB 160.

Ickowitz and Freeman filed the petition early Friday afternoon, and it is currently pending review. The charges, if accepted, would lead to a trial addressing the alleged violations of SB 160.

“I strongly believe the ASUC should follow the correct procedures in passing these bills,” Ickowitz said. “Because SB 160 has such an intense conversation around it, to not follow the procedures does a disservice to the campus.”

The root of the charges lies with the language of the bill, which Ickowitz said “presupposes that the bill has the authority to restrict spending and funding without having gone through appropriate channels.”

The charges begin with the fact that the bill was not passed with a two-thirds senate majority, which the ASUC Constitution states is required for deliberations regarding ASUC financial appropriations or revenue reductions.

They also argue that the bill “restricted” the ASUC’s investment practices, a responsibility that lies with the Investment Committee and requires consent from the Constitutional and Procedural Review Committee. The bill, with its “commanding” language, oversteps these bodies and “overextends the powers of the ASUC Senate without due process,” Ickowitz said.

In the charges, Ickowitz and Freeman suggest that SB 160 be sent back to the senate for a two-thirds vote to either follow or suspend the bylaws requiring review by these committees.

Before filing, Ickowitz and Freeman notified Student Action Senator George Kadifa and independent Senator Sadia Saifuddin, author and sponsor of SB 160, respectively, of their intent to petition the bill.

“I’m disappointed that the students who brought the charges didn’t bring these up earlier,” Kadifa said. “I’m a little curious, now that the bill has passed, why they’re bringing this up now. If the petition is accepted, we would rewrite the bill to ensure there are no violations.”

The petition has joined other suits that the ASUC Judicial Council must review in the coming weeks, including charges against Safeena Mecklai, a Student Action senator and external affairs vice president-elect.

ASUC Attorney General Hinh Tran said Ickowitz and Freeman raised some “interesting points,” noting that both of them have a “strong understanding of ASUC policies.” Tran said that should the petition be accepted and litigation begin, a trial would hopefully be scheduled before the end of the semester — if not, it might be held during the summer session.

Ickowitz said he felt that there was a “high likelihood the charges will be accepted,” emphasizing that the arguments were made on legal rather than ideological grounds. However, he did note that ideology was part of the impetus for filing.

Ickowitz pointed to the charges filed by Cooperative Movement Senator Jorge Pacheco and Student Action Senator Mihir Deo against ASUC President Connor Landgraf’s executive order to place the health and wellness referendum on the ballot as an example of people filing “that which is relevant to them.”

Notably, the senators did not charge the Class Pass referendum, even though it allegedly violated the same bylaws as the health and wellness referendum.

“When people sue over legislation, it’s not at all out of the ordinary that legislation is relevant to them,” Ickowitz said. “It’s also coupled with relevance to me and my community.”

View the petition evidence below:

Contact Sophie Ho at sho@dailycal.org.

Correction(s):
A previous version of this article incorrectly identified the petition as a charge sheet.

The post Charges allege senate violated constitution in passing divestment bill appeared first on The Daily Californian.

SB 158, originally introduced as an alternative to divestment bill SB 160, was authored by SQUELCH! Senator Jason Bellet and Student Action Senator Rafi Lurie. The authors themselves requested that the bill be tabled indefinitely saying that to that the bill’s language had been too watered down in the ASUC’s Committee on University & External Affairs.

“The authors of this bill submitted the bill with certain language and the bill was edited down and edited down,” Lurie said during the meeting. “The language we (originally) put in there is what our community wanted to see. Table this instead of passing some half bill.”

The bill would encourage the ASUC to take financial and political action to help end the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, recognizing harm inflicted on both side and affirming the right for a Jewish State. The bill would also indicate that the ASUC supports a two state solution.

Lurie maintained that the discussion surrounding the bill would not be laid to rest but instead addressed in a different bill.

Other senators, including CalSERVE Senator Nolan Pack and Student Action Senator George Kadifa, also addressed issues with the bill’s wording.

“I wouldn’t necessarily be opposed to passing the bill as it came out of committee, but I am definitely opposed to many of the changes the authors are proposing,” Pack said in an email. “Specifically, the authors are packing the bill with loaded language that implicitly endorses disagreeable policies that may not be obvious at face value.”

Independent Senator Sadia Saifuddin said that that she felt portions of the bill were exclusionary to non-Jewish people living in Israel.

“I was not in support of some of the proposed amendments by the senators because the language was exclusionary by its nature and extraordinarily vague,” Saifuddin said in an email.

Bellet addressed concerns about the language of the bill saying that the bill is grounded in international law and correct in referring to Israel as a Jewish state.

“Jewish people and Palestinian people have a right to self determination,” Bellet said during discussion. “This bill supports Israel’s right to exist as a Jewish state.”

CalSERVE senator and ASUC President-elect DeeJay Pepito said she voted against tabling the bill because she felt the discussion while worthwhile, was too short.

“To be clear, Senators who voted yes on SB 160 were more than willing to vote yes on SB 158 also,” Pepito said in an email. “We just wanted a conversation on amendments and language use within its text. I am troubled tonight knowing that the conversation on 158 was so short. This bill deserved time on the Senate floor — the community supporting SB 158 deserved time on the Senate floor.”

Ally Rondoni is the lead student government reporter. Contact her at arondoni@dailycal.org.

The post Senate votes to table divestment opposition bill SB 158 appeared first on The Daily Californian.

A variety of factors could explain CalSERVE’s ascendance this year. First, a new limit on party spending probably helped to level the playing field for all candidates. To that end, the fact that SQUELCH! departed from its largely satirical past and ran an entirely serious senate slate in addition to nominating a presidential candidate cannot be ignored. This year, SQUELCH! became a legitimate alternative to the two strongest student political parties, providing voters with more diverse choices.

While students saw SQUELCH! and CalSERVE reinventing themselves, Student Action remained unflinchingly static. But CalSERVE’s biggest strength over the other parties was its organization and the caliber of its candidates.

When thousands of students elected CalSERVE candidates to three of the four main executive offices and seven of the 20 senate seats, they voted for a party with a clear set of values. Where Student Action seemed vague and unimaginative, CalSERVE successfully delivered a strong message centered around progressive politics that resonated well with the student body. CalSERVE’s newly elected executives and senators are passionate leaders who will not shy away from taking decisive stances on tough political issues. Students know where they stand.

Yet the CalSERVE elected officials must also be wary of becoming too divisive. Debate around the ASUC Senate’s controversial divestment bill last week has reinforced in students’ minds how easily the campus climate can be strained and fractured. At the same time that they work to uphold their beliefs, the CalSERVE officials — especially the incoming executives — must try to build coalitions among all students.

Similarly, they will be largely responsible for setting the tone for the ASUC’s relationship with incoming chancellor Nicholas Dirks. As promised during the campaign,  they will need to establish a strong connection with Dirks that keeps him visible and accountable to student interests.

The students who voted in the ASUC election spoke loud and clear this year: They supported the promise of a change in leadership. Now, CalSERVE must deliver on its mandate.

The post CalSERVE’s call to action appeared first on The Daily Californian.

DeeJay Pepito, president-elect from CalSERVE, said her first move will be to continue working to improve campus safety, especially with regard to sexual assault, considering that the ASUC Senate recently passed a bill expressing no confidence in the university’s sexual assault policies.

Pepito said she has already met with with her co-authors on the bill, SB 130, to talk about creating more resources for victims of sexual assault and clarify the reporting process, among other policy changes.

Another big issue Pepito must grapple with as president is that of the campus climate in light of the recent senate vote to divest from companies affiliated with the Israeli military. Grant Fineman, a recently elected senator from SQUELCH!, said the vote “disheartened” many within the Jewish community.

“There’s definitely some rebuilding to be done, especially because some people are not confident about the ASUC,” Fineman said.

As part of this rebuilding process, Pepito said she intends to establish a campus climate department within the ASUC to address these issues and create opportunities for disparate communities to collaborate with one another.

“Regardless of what ‘side’ students might identify with, there were people hurt, and there were people impacted on both sides of the issue,” Pepito said. “We want to stay away from framing this as a one-sided issue. This bill (SB 160) really highlights that there are still problems on our campus. We all need to take responsibility and accountability by taking responsibility for our actions and acknowledging that our words hurt others.”

Pepito will start shadowing current ASUC President Connor Landgraf in the coming weeks.

Executive Vice President-elect Nolan Pack of CalSERVE emphasized that he aims to work closely with the new senatorial class and will meet with senators individually before the end of the semester to build constructive relationships.

“For the past few years, the power dynamic has been such that executives believe they do not have to act at the direction of the senate, and the senate has been reluctant to exercise its power as the final legislative and administrative authority of the ASUC,” Pack said in an email. “Instead, the senate has assigned itself an unreasonable amount of administrative tasks. This has made the senate a structurally inefficient body.”

Pack said he hopes the senate will feel more comfortable in assigning more tasks to the executive slate, which will allow senators more time to work on platforms and community projects.

Valerie Jameson of CalSERVE and Safeena Mecklai of Student Action, academic affairs and external affairs vice presidential-elects respectively, echoed Pack’s sentiments. Both said they look forward to reaching out to the new senators. In the past, Jameson said she has seen a “strong disconnect” between the executive officers and senators.

“It’s twofold,” Jameson said. ”The senators have to keep the executives accountable, and the executives have to be out there and to help them in their ideas.” Along with reaching out to senators, Jameson said she will continue working on her textbook scholarship program.

Although Mecklai was the only Student Action candidate elected to executive office, neither she nor any of the other newly elected executive officials expressed concern over partisanship.

“The four of us want to do what’s best for the student body and are going to work well together,” Mecklai said. “I am not looking to the future as concern but as a challenge. There are a lot of external issues and so much to be done.”

Contact Sophie Ho at sho@dailycal.org.

The post Executive-elects discuss their plans for office appeared first on The Daily Californian.

The charges were dropped because most of the candidates in question lost their bids for office, so any censures against them would have no effect, according to ASUC Attorney General Hinh Tran.

Petitions were filed last week against the entire Student Action executive slate — presidential candidate Rafi Lurie, executive vice presidential candidate Chen-Chen Huo, academic affairs vice presidential candidate Ryan Kang and Mecklai — for sending unsolicited emails. A petition was also filed against CalSERVE senate candidate Taylor Fugere alleging the same charges.

“According to the Council, censures for losing candidates are not an effective remedy for the violations alleged in my petition,” Tran said in an email. “Although Safeena did win, my office had filed suit against the entire Executive Slate in a single petition, and apparently the Council rejected the petition in its entirety.”

The Judicial Council will assess a separate charge against Mecklai for campaigning in the residence halls at a trial scheduled for May 2 in Unit 1’s Slottman Hall at 8 p.m.

The other candidates were charged with violating Section 12.5 of the election bylaws, which prohibits candidates from sending unsolicited emails.

Had the candidates been found in violation of this section, each would have received one censure. In order to be disqualified from the election, they would need to receive a total of five censures.

According to Student Action party chair Joey Lam, the email in question was sent due to a miscommunication. He said that the executive candidates met other people with the same name and accidentally sent it to the student who made the complaint.

Fugere cited a similar reason, saying one of her staff members accidentally sent the email to the wrong listserv.

Andrea Guzman covers academics and administration. Contact her at aguzman@dailycal.org and on Twitter @guzmanandrea5.

The post Judicial Council rejects petitions filed against several ASUC candidates appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Tony Zhou/Staff

Change was the buzzword in this year’s ASUC election. Not only did CalSERVE successfully elect its first presidential candidate in four years, but traditionally satirical party SQUELCH! claimed its stake in the campus political scene as a viable third-party contender.

CalSERVE won a majority of the executive slate positions, ending Student Action’s dominant streak of the last few years. Student Action also lost its 11-seat majority within the senate, relinquishing one seat to CalSERVE and the other to SQUELCH!. Notably, the Cooperative Movement party lost its single senatorial seat for the first time in four years.

“I thought that in this election year, more than others, there was the most number of curveballs,” said SQUELCH! party chair and former columnist for The Daily Californian Noah Ickowitz. “It’s the craziest election in the last four years.”

The emergence of SQUELCH! as a serious party is perhaps the largest “curveball” of this election season; its decision to run a nonsatirical slate made it a “driving force” in the campus political arena, according to CalSERVE Communications Coordinator Matthew Enger.

Student Action Party Signatory Joey Lam also emphasized SQUELCH!’s new presence and effect on the election.

“It’s definitely disappointing that we couldn’t repeat the success that we’ve had in previous years,” Lam said. “SQUELCH! having such a strong presence and serious slate definitely had an impact on us this year.”

According to Lam, some of SQUELCH!’s candidates and some from Student Action had mutual friends, which might have split votes during the election.

“I would say that Student Action wasn’t used to be challenged, especially from two strong parties,” Enger said. ”SQUELCH! running a serious slate could seriously encroach on the communities that Student Action usually represents.” He noted that presidential candidates Jason Bellet of SQUELCH! and Rafi Lurie of Student Action were drawing on many of the same communities.

SQUELCH!’s success this year — electing two of its seven senatorial candidates and having its presidential candidate come in second — may not be short-lived, either. Ickowitz said that SQUELCH! intends to continue running as a serious third party, pointing to Bellet’s success as indicative of its ability to elect a candidate to an executive seat.

Parties also had to deal with new spending caps, which meant in some cases redesigning their campaigns. CalSERVE redesigned its spending budget to reduce costs and maximize visibility, Enger said, declining to give specifics on the exact changes.

CalSERVE Elections Coordinator Anais LaVoie attributed CalSERVE’s success to the broadening of its coalition by slating a larger number of candidates from a variety of communities. Along with apportioning funds to amplify its online presence, CalSERVE began running workshops to train candidates in campaigning, recruiting volunteers and maximizing social-media presence, Enger said.

In comparison, Lam said that Student Action’s campaign did not differ dramatically from that of last year. Similar to CalSERVE, Student Action ran a retreat for its candidates to train them as potential senators. Lam said that Student Action aimed to spend its budget as transparently as possible, noting no specific changes from previous years.

LaVoie, however, said she felt that Student Action’s slate was not as strong as in past years.

“When it came down to it, they were complacent, having swept two years in a row,” LaVoie said. “I don’t think they were very ambitious about picking their candidates.”

While Student Action did run a smaller senatorial slate than it did last year, Lam said he believed this year’s slate was just as qualified as any other.

“We slated every single one of our candidates because we always have great belief in them and think they’re going to make great changes,” Lam said. “We pick our students to represent as wide of a community as possible. We did the same this year.”

All party leaders look forward to the next year with high hopes. In particular, Ickowitz said he hopes that the changed makeup of the senate, in which no party has a majority, will force collaboration among senators.

“When parties have to learn to cooperate with each other, it does more than create an atmosphere of collaboration,” Ickowitz said. “The larger diversity in the senate creates an atmosphere of collaboration in the wider Berkeley campus.”

Contact Sophie Ho at sho@dailycal.org.

The post Campaign tactics changes may have affected election outcome appeared first on The Daily Californian.

Tony Zhou/Staff

Experience the announcement of the 2013 ASUC Election results, as seen from 155 Dwinelle. Read more here.

The post 2013 ASUC Election results appeared first on The Daily Californian.