Students must make their voices heard if they want a voice at all

Originally published March 5, 2009.

“Seriously, who cares?”

This all-too-fitting line closed Jordan Harp’s column on Tuesday. In it, he also gave students the benefit of the doubt, suggesting that they’re informed rather than apathetic (at least when it comes to student elections).

I’m not buying it.

Quite a few things have happened on campus as of late that suggest otherwise – that students don’t know and don’t care. While I feel the ongoing debates over Cotton Club really take the cake in terms of student ignorance and apathy, student elections this week really were the icing on top.

In an article than ran in Tuesday’s DI, two student candidates for senate openly admitted that the race for office is based almost purely on name recognition, which you know firsthand if you’ve walked across any sidewalk on campus in the last few weeks.

Our candidates, hungry for recognition, simply facilitated the student body’s inclination toward ignorance. I didn’t see a single poster offering an abbreviated list of platform points for any candidate, but I can rest assured knowing that Chris Chung has been “ghostridin’ the whip since 1988.”

For students not looking to glorify their resumes, elected student positions may not mean all that much. Their irrelevance is facilitated by this kind of obnoxious campaigning devoid of information. Though some candidates boasted campaign Web sites offering enlightenment on their stances and endorsements by RSOs, the majority of students never make it past the slogans plastered across every inch of University property.

Long story short, no one has any idea what people are running for, and the lack of “serious power” behind elected student officials convinces voters that it doesn’t matter. If we’re all too cynical about these positions to even bother to vote for the candidates, then no one will give a second thought to demanding a change in the power structure. If we want student officials to have more than just a voice that administrators can promptly ignore, it begins with the general student population giving a damn.

We care so little that most students don’t even seem to know their rights – that is, what methods of campaigning the Student Election Commission bars in order to maintain our privacy. According to the 2009 election guidelines packet, candidates cannot campaign “within 50 feet of any publicly accessible university computer,” nor can they post campaign material on other surfaces besides University bulletin boards or Illiosks.

I found campaign handouts conveniently left beside the printer in a computer lab Tuesday morning after online voting had opened, and I definitely ran into campaign ads stapled up in classrooms for most of February, an activity that is expressly frowned upon.

Finally, the kicker for me was receiving not one, but two generic campaign e-mails to my University account from a candidate. While I was unable to find anything expressly listed in the Appropriate Use Policy or other Information Tech Policies, I have a strong hunch that this is not allowed – otherwise, we’d have all gotten something from every candidate even entertaining the idea of running for student office.

At the end of the day, our right to avoid visual assault by campaign material is sacrificed by our lack of information. In addition, we lose our right to demand that our elected body of student officials actually wield some power in the process of shaping our experiences at this institution, from our tuition rates to the number of recycling bins available on campus.

No, voting on its own isn’t enough to make a difference. But it’s the first step toward proving we as a student body care about what happens on campus. Instead of advocating to administrators the meaninglessness of our voices, we have to vocally push for change, starting with the enforcement of campaign guidelines and moving all the way up to the roles of our student politicians.

If we want change, we have to make it ourselves.

Chelsea is a senior in English and creative writing and wonders if froth art in coffee is a subtle form of flirtation.

Is your third-party vote a waste?

Originally published October 23, 2008.

As the days until November 4th fly past us with increasing speed, we’re watching Senators Obama and McCain campaign in swing states with renewed vigor. We’ve flocked to our televisions for three presidential debates between the two nominees, and one for their running mates. It’s impossible to go anywhere and not see one of these four names, and when one is mentioned, the other three are sure to follow.

What you don’t see are the names Bob Barr and Wayne Allyn Root. Despite his constant presence in presidential elections, you don’t really see Ralph Nader either, or his running mate Matt Gonzales. You certainly don’t see the names Cynthia McKinney and Rosa Clemente. But in most states, the Libertarian, Independent and Green candidates will be on the ballot. What’s more, choices from all three representations will be interspersed among selections for federal and state congressional positions.

So, for all those undecided voters out there: If neither Obama nor McCain appeals to you, perhaps one of those other tickets does. But with them looms the dread of the “wasted vote.”

We all know the concept of the wasted vote. I lived in Texas during the 2004 election, and although I wasn’t old enough to vote at the time, it wouldn’t have mattered anyway – one blue vote in a sea of red. Similarly during this race, Illinois’s allegiance to Obama has never been questioned.

We stress our civic duty as an opportunity for the people to shape their governments. Our vote is our voice. Therefore, people should vote for whomever they believe to be the best candidate for the job – so we say, anyway. It’s difficult to deny the reality that the United States is often mired by fanatically bipartisan political representation. To vote for a politician unaffiliated with either major party, in most cases, means voting for someone who doesn’t stand a chance at actually winning office. In this sense, it becomes easy to believe that a vote for someone other than a Republican or a Democrat is also a wasted one. How can we help but feel disillusioned about the power of our beliefs?

In a presidential election, this may all be of debatable consequence depending upon how you view the Electoral College. Federal and state congressional elections are a different matter when it comes to the impact of the popular vote, but the wasted vote concept still applies. The dilemma: Do you vote for someone who really represents your beliefs but who likely won’t win, or do you bite the bullet and vote for a major-party person who you don’t completely support because they are a “realistic choice”?

If you’re diametrically opposed to the other major-party candidate, this question is crucial. If you vote for the third-party candidate you really want, you’re obviously subtracting a vote from the candidate you despise. However, if the race is tight, you’re also taking a vote from the tolerable major-party contender that could actually win the position.

This whole conundrum plays directly into the way the media frames elections as sporting events. If we have to consider whether to vote “strategically,” our attention over time ceases to focus on the policy goals of candidates (aside from trendy central issues, for which candidates will provide no detailed, step-by-step solutions). Their potential for victory becomes most important, trailed by our tolerance of said candidates – a short-sighted goal in an increasingly short-sighted bipartisan political system.

To everyone willing to cast their ballot toward people they wholeheartedly support, I admire you. Unfortunately, I find myself thinking back to Ralph Nader. If his status as a write-in on the New Hampshire primary ballot in 1992 is included, his 2008 candidacy will be his fifth. I cannot imagine how jaded one can become spending years backing a person who will never end up in the White House.

Perhaps this is the reason for voter apathy. At some point, we cannot stand to feel let down anymore. Like being unable to turn away from a car accident, we cannot help but be overwhelmed by the constant concern that we have wasted our vote, our hopes and our time. But after mailing my absentee ballot this week, I find myself unable to give up my youthful idealism that every vote counts for something.

Chelsea is a senior in English and music and after voting, can’t stand to wait another 12 days for results.