Original Article: http://dartreview.com/archives/2008/04/21/student_assembly_election_roundup.php
Monday, April 21, 2008
This last Wednesday, the elections for Student Assembly concluded, with Molly Bode and Nafeesa Remtilla victorious as Student Assembly President and Vice President, respectively. Amidst promises and catchy slogans, the two election winners are now gearing to try and fulfill those promises. In the worst-case scenario, this may extend no further than hollow posturing, as SA executives have no accountability—there are no consequences for disregarding their campaign promises or defying their nonexistent parties—so at the end of the term, the office may enter history as a line on a student’s résumé and a context for next year’s campaigns. This makes it necessary to remind the student population of the candidates’ platforms, promises, and statements (yes, there was more to the election than “Vote Bode” and “NafizzleFo-Shizzle”); then, at the very least, we may preserve some measure of accountability.
The election process itself also garnered some attention. Due to general apathy and severe lack of attendance at events meant to disseminate information about the candidates, it seems nearly impossible that large portions of the student population had even a vague notion of what they were voting for. Having stations where students could vote manned by Bode supporters glaring over your shoulders might have been slightly over the top. Therefore, it would behoove the students to be familiar with the issues in contention to make sure their decision wasn’t more than a little premature.
The Greek Debate
On Thursday, April 10, SAE hosted the debate on Greek issues where only the presidential candidates were present. Hosted by the charismatic and innovative David Imamura ’10, the debate fostered bickering and interruptions galore.
The overtone of the debate was set by the opening statements in which Bode stated her desire for reform in the Greek system to make the institution a more acceptable and lasting component of Dartmouth life. Lee Cooper took this a step further by emphasizing his intimate knowledge with setting specific goals that could actually be accomplished. He hoped to bring a new infrastructure to the campus that would make new social spaces and the Greek system viable areas for friendly interaction. Both candidates mentioned being vice president of their respective Greek houses correlating this to their ability and experience with the system as a whole. This notwithstanding, Cooper pointed out critical elements of the status quo, which made the present ripe for development given his form of leadership. These included the new dean’s more liberal stance regarding Greek houses and the disconnect between the organizations involved in making decisions concerning the system. Cooper asserted that his leadership would take advantage of these portentous circumstances and usher the establishment into a new era where local houses could bring equality and lasting stability to the cultural phenomenon that is the Dartmouth Greek scene.
The following questions were apropos of gender relations and other equality concerns. The debate delved into strings of acronyms (COSO, GLC, IFC, SAPA, SEMP, etc.), and as soon as the audience deciphered one acronym, the discussion had moved on. Cooper voiced his general campaign platform of cooperation many times in various contexts: inter-fraternity collaboration such as joint meetings, cooperation between SA and the administration, unification of different organizations such as COSO and SA, and so forth. Bode took a stab at Cooper’s idealism, noting the impracticality of such ventures and the lack of venues through which such action could be taken. Cooper jumped right back citing his leadership skills and his proactive mentality. He then impugned Bode’s ‘practical’ efforts by denouncing alternative space parties as failures – the Cutter/Shabazz party was meagerly attended and failed to cement any sort of change. Bode replied, “The party brought a lot of new people in [to Cutter/Shabazz] who had never stepped in before. You don’t need alcohol to do that.”
The discussion later turned to alcohol policies and possible reform of the Social Event Management Procedures. Cooper took the helm on this point and demanded that the next president change the policies so that they are more reasonable and fair. He made it a point to bombast about his future meeting with Dean Crady and their similar viewpoints on the necessary changes to alcohol policies. They both want SEMP to become less quantitative and more responsibility based. Punishments would be served not if a house exceeds a set number of kegs, but rather if it behaves irresponsibly. Bode’s alternative was to allow each house to write their own policies with additional information ensuring the policies’ enforcement. Cooper pointed out that this idea would ultimately fail due to the lack of institutional memory.
The debate went into methods to enfranchise minority houses and give unaffiliated students social spaces. Both candidates had similar views on these issues; they agreed that the voices of these underrepresented students should be heard and that alternative solutions to mainstream Greek life should be advertised. This would help recruitment for minority houses and would make students feel comfortable with lobbying for new social spaces.
The debate ended with closing statements that echoed the opening.
EPAC Debate
This debate included the vice presidential candidates as well and slated a slew of various issues, not the least of which was the Greek system. The format consisted of a section where questions were asked by the EPAC directed at specific candidates then the candidates were allowed to ask each other questions.
The first question for each candidate: Which would you focus on, student services or advocacy?
Ms. Remtilla and her fellow vice presidential candidates all agreed that student advocacy was the most important issue for the next term in Student Assembly as this has been lacking in previous years. Bode agreed and added that student services are great for everyday life but don’t fulfill the purpose of Student Assembly which is to provide a voice for the student body. Cooper on the other hand said that student services should be prioritized because this is the best way to engender trust and participation in SA, which would in turn help the advocacy function.
EPAC then asked Cooper what the major difference was between him and his opponent. Cooper said that he envisions matters from a more holistic perspective and is more courageous. He feels that current SA practice is to just sit around and talk instead of taking action in spite of potential criticism. The committee inquired as to Bode’s response, and she returned by saying that she has actually engaged in practical initiatives to help students address their concerns.
The moderators also asked Bode if she would be able to devote enough time to SA given her numerous other activities on campus. She reasoned that her other responsibilities wouldn’t detract from her presidency because they are for the most part all related to student life. She also added later that she only needs four more classes to graduate, so her light course load will alleviate the pressures of extracurricular work.
Another question for the presidential candidates was how they would deal with the different requests for UFC funding. Cooper said that the issue was one of prioritizing and leadership – the requests must be looked at and prioritized according to importance for the student body. Bode, however, proposed an overhaul of UFC funding, so that it would be more accountable and a larger sector of the student population would learn to take advantage of it.
The vice presidential candidates were asked how they would help alcohol or drug-free organizations become established as social spaces. Chuck Zodda and Tay Stevenson both agreed that there is a culture of drinking at Dartmouth, which could limit the viability of alcohol-free social spaces. They both proposed overarching change to the administration and bureaucracy involved in the creation of these changes, so that they might be more easily created and financed. Miesha Smith said it was a misconception to think drinking is so pervasive that it is a prerequisite to making a social space. She feels that SA should take the lead in making new alternative social spaces. Remtilla, on the other hand, advocated Pangaea, an organization that brings many groups together to spend time without alcohol.
The EPAC later asked the VP candidates what their methods of reform might entail. Zodda and Stevenson were once again in agreement by expressing the need for change from without to help SA’s image and functionality. They both stressed the need to disencumber SA of its image as an exclusive club. Remtilla expressed her disdain and declared that internal reform must precede any changes in external image. She proposed having plank persons on each committee to report on the issues, and making General Assembly more fun by having it hosted by different organizations.
The last section of the debate was, in a word, ridiculous. Each candidate was given the opportunity to ask two questions, one to a presidential candidate and the other to a vice presidential candidate. Some of the questions were blatant plugs, with Remtilla going so far as to ask Bode what she would look for in a vice presidential candidate. Of course, Remtilla’s first year roommate replied with as close a description to Remtilla as possible without being embarrassingly transparent.
The Election
As the election came and went, Bode and Remtilla were chosen to lead next year’s student assembly perhaps because they belonged to the exclusive “Club SA”; perhaps because, as some bitter at the results have claimed, the Student Assembly elections are never more than a simple popularity contest; or perhaps—cynics beware! —because the two women actually ran the highest-quality campaigns and the student body at large felt that they were the best qualified for the job. Whether or not we as students made the best decisions in our voting, now that the election has passed, we should keep in mind their campaigns, to hold Bode and Remtilla accountable for their positions.