My name is Chris Zamlout and I am the executive vice president of the Student Association (SA). I’ve worked in the SA for four years and absolutely love it. Every day this year, I’ve worked to make this institution even better. As dedicated as I am to the SA, I’m not naive enough to believe it’s perfect. In fact, I value the SA enough to point out its inefficiencies and problems. And there is one glaring problem I cannot ignore: our elections. SA E-Board elections are broken because of the candidates themselves. The only way to fix this is to hold candidates accountable and start asking the right questions.
The SA’s purpose is to serve every single undergraduate student, and we allow them all to run for our E-Board. While this inclusive policy seems fair on the surface, certain candidates who run for these positions leave much to be desired. Some candidates are qualified, with prior experience working in their relevant offices. Others barely know the duties their potential position involves. If such candidates win, it will hurt the SA and student body as a whole.
Students are busy. Every student does not have the time to understand the intricacies of the SA. Unfortunately, this knowledge gap allows unqualified candidates to misrepresent themselves to student groups. Candidates pitch ideas that aren’t remotely feasible, attractive, or even necessary, and receive support. When these candidates spread false information and lie to student groups about what they can achieve, it damages the SA’s reputation and relationships with the students the SA exists to serve. That’s when I have a problem.
Last year, before I announced my candidacy for EVP, I worked closely in the EVP office with my predecessor. Before I won, I thought I knew absolutely everything the position involved. As engaged as I was, I still needed to spend time learning about my new responsibilities. If candidates who’ve barely stepped into the SA office win, they’ll encounter an even steeper learning curve. By the time they learn exactly what their responsibilities are, it might be too late.
How do we solve this? Previous E-Boards debated creating a vetting process: a pool of people trained in certain fields with specific qualifications able to run for office. Anyone outside this pool would be unable to run because they lack the necessary requirements and qualifications. This ensures that people who take these positions are competent, but it goes against the inclusive and open approach the SA has taken in years past. It diminishes what the SA represents at its core.
The SA shouldn’t close off elections to the student body, but we must hold each candidate to his or her word. Maybe then candidates will be forthright and better informed. I’ve spoken with many E-Board leaders who felt that certain candidates’ platforms appear laughable. If we want quality candidates to win, it is necessary to publicly confront prospective SA E-Board members with our concerns and questions. That way candidates cannot exploit voters’ ignorance. More students will be better able to identify which candidate is right for the job.
I simply want to make sure that a trustworthy individual with the same passion for serving students takes over as EVP, and every other position on E-Board. We need campus to weed out the qualified and passionate from the self-interested and misinformed. Moral of the story: Don’t be afraid to ask questions and see some of them squirm!
– Christopher Zamlout is a senior majoring in Philosophy, Politics, and Law and Executive Vice President of the Student Association