Inside the Undergraduate Senate

Miss the blog?

2010-10-23T09:52:00.003-04:00

Well you're a tool if you do. But if you're really desperate for some SG blogging, check this out.

I'm back.

2010-04-30T17:16:00.003-04:00

So I previously said that I was done blogging. But this is just too good not to mention. One of President MacCracken's final acts was to veto Senator Dalton's bill, which would have prevented students from serving in both the executive branch and the Senate at the same time. There will be a special session on Sunday to attempt to override his veto.

The End's Not Near, It's Here

2010-04-26T16:31:00.002-04:00

Bonus points to anybody that knows which TV show's last episode has the same title as this post. Don't Google it, that's cheating.

Anyways, the new executives were sworn in yesterday, and the new administration is officially underway. And I am graduating in approximately 12 days and 16 hours, so I guess that it is time to say goodbye.

I've had a lot of fun sharing my opinion with you over the course of the last year. Thank you so much for reading and sharing your opinion, even though I know that many of us disagree on many things. Thank yous are also due to those of you in the SG that were willing to talk to me, even though I am clearly not a legitimate member of the media. I wish Nate, Maia, Kent, Ed, and everyone else willing to take up the SG cause nothing but the best of luck next year.

I will conclude with the two pieces of advice that I have been trying to impress upon people ever since I started paying attention:

SG: Stop taking yourselves so seriously.

Students: It's about time that you start giving a shit.

That's all, folks. Good luck to all of you. Goodbye.

End of Year SG Grades

2010-04-22T13:38:00.005-04:00

The Eagle used to give out letter grades to all of the executives and the Senate at the end of the school year to assess their performance. This year, they took the easy road and simply wrote an editorial, without letter grades. I can't say that I blame them. Grading something like this is pretty subjective, and completely arbitrary. But my blog has no problem being subjective or arbitrary, so here I go:

President Andy MacCracken: B+
If I had been President, there are some things that I would have done differently. But overall, Andy did a pretty good job. As The Eagle noted, he took student input very seriously, even when not much input was offered. His opposition to the Super Loop is evidence of that. He also took a very positive step toward getting a student Metro discount with the AU ID-Smartrip thing. However, he is still missing a defining accomplishment. He was never able to find the one issue that truly resonates with people and make it his own. That said, the one thing that I have learned in everything that I have been involved in is that it is nearly impossible to make big changes in one year. That would have been the best argument for Andy being re-elected had he decided to run again. Nate Bronstein (Andy's hand-picked successor) will have a unique opportunity to carry the MacCracken momentum forward.

Vice President Alex Prescott: C
Not having a Founder's Day Ball is what he will always be remembered for. But I am not going to give him an F, because not all of the blame can be placed upon him for that fiasco. And, as The Eagle also noted, most students were happy with KPU and SUB this year, which fall under his leadership.

Former Comptroller Matt Handverger: B-
The only thing he ever did wrong was misreport his hours on his timesheet. That is not ok, but it is also not the end of the world.

Comptroller Alan Chang: A
He's a Comptroller and he didn't fuck anything up. What more can you ask for?

Secretary Colin Meiselman
Since I used to work for him, I will maintain some journalistic integrity and refrain from giving him a grade. I will say that he didn't really do anything spectacular (except for the AUSG recruiter, which I still think is awesome), but his goal of streamlining communications is an admirable one, and something that I think incoming Secretary Hiebel can make work. But I still don't like the website.

The Undergraduate Senate: F
Sorry guys. First of all, let me say that of all the grades, this one is the most arbitrary and subjective. Over the last year, we have had two Senates, four Speakers, and countless different members. Assigning a grade to such a diverse group is pretty much a complete waste of time, but that's what I do. The bottom line is this: the only time anybody payed attention to the Senate was when they were doing something that was ultimately pointless (impeachment, election certification, budget). At no point did they ever unite behind an issue that actually mattered to students. Certainly there are many, many individual Senators that do great work on behalf of the students. I recognize that. But as a body, it is dysfunctional, and does not serve a sound purpose. Way too much time is spent on amending the bylaws and "debating how to debate" (credit: Seth Rosenstein). Not enough time was spent on the countless issues that make an impact on the lives of students. My advice (not that you asked for it): Quit taking yourselves so seriously (you are in fucking college you don't need to where a suit all of the time!), figure out a way to make the rules so that they don't need to be changed every week, and continue having the same heated, passionate debates that you always do, but focus on issues that we give a shit about.

Giving credit where credit is due

2010-04-21T23:28:00.003-04:00

I criticize the SG often, but I feel that I am also pretty willing to acknowledge when they do something right. And man, those cupcakes in the Tavern tonight were good. And smoothies, too? I'll take that over a Founder's Day Ball any day of the week.

Coming later tomorrow: I will be giving year end grades to each of the executives, and the Senate. Be sure to check it out.

The Eagle listened

2010-04-19T14:36:00.002-04:00

Last week, The Eagle ignored the SG. Today, they have a front page story about the passing of the budget. I can't help but take the credit for their sudden shift in priorities.

The budget is passed!

2010-04-18T18:56:00.002-04:00

Finally, debate has been closed, and the budget has been approved by a vote of 21-3. Women's Initiative will be allocated $22,000 next year. I'll post the final budget, and how it compares to last year's, later. That was fun. Except not really. What a shitshow.

Another bump to the WI budget

2010-04-18T18:47:00.003-04:00

The Cruz Amendment passes by vote of 11-10-3, and the budget for Women's Initiative now sits at $22,000. An amendment is now before the body to increase the KPU budget.

Habash Amendment fails

2010-04-18T18:30:00.003-04:00

Women's Initiative's budget still sits at $21,500. Dalton then attempts to close debate once again, and his motion fails. Thus, we continue.

Senator Cruz has now introduced an amendment to, among other things, direct another $500 to Women's Initiative.

Another effort to increase WI budget fails

2010-04-18T18:13:00.003-04:00

An amendment to increase the WI budget back to $23,000 (and move a bunch of other money all over the place) has failed. Senator Dalton leaned back and whispered to me that he thought it was "the worst amendment ever."

He then attempted to close debate on the budget. Interestingly, it takes a 2/3 majority to close debate, making the Undergraduate Senate officially as inefficient as the United States Senate.

The motion to close debate fails by a vote of 10-11. And so we continue...

Another effort is now being made to increase funding for WI, taking money from KPU and Founder's Day.

UPDATE: The amendment passes, taking WI's funding up to $21,500. Dalton then attempts to close debate, and fails. Nirvana Habash has now introduced an amendment to take $1,000 from the Class of 2011 and give it to Women's Initiative.

The Amending Process

2010-04-18T17:20:00.003-04:00

An amendment has passed to increase the budget for WI back to $23,000, which is the same amount that they received last year.

Senator Dalton has now introduced an amendment to take it back down to $20,000, reallocating the extra money to KPU and SUB. The amendment is being debated now. Several Senators call it a "happy medium." Others say that WI needs the money, and we don't need to cut their funding in order to give more to KPU and SUB.

UPDATE: Dalton's amendment passes by a vote of 12-10-2. WI's funding is now at $20,000 as the process continues.

Senator Dalton presents the budget

2010-04-18T16:02:00.004-04:00

The total requests for funds totaled over $800,000 (for a budget of less than $600,000). He touts the new travel subsidy, claims that it will become a hallmark program of the AUSG. Also touts the new money going towards the bike lending program.

He says that Women's Initiative only existed as a precursor to an actual Women's Resource Center. Since such a Center will exist next year, it is no longer necessary to continue to increase their funding.

Dalton's argument is very well organized, and well prepared.

If it's Sunday...

2010-04-18T15:41:00.001-04:00

I'm a little late, but I'm here in Kogod for today's meeting of the Undergraduate Senate. The budget debate will be taking place shortly. Once again, I must recommend that you check out Gertold's Twitter page.

The Women's Initiative Budget

2010-04-16T15:12:00.003-04:00

There will be lots going on in the Senate on Sunday. The most contentious issue, which we got a preview of last week, will likely be over the budget. The budget allocates the SG's $590,400 among the various departments, and must be approved by the Senate. The controversy this year is centered upon the fact that Women's Initiative is slated receive less money as compared to last year.

WI supporters have been throwing around the statistic that this year's budget decreases their funding from last year by 44%. As far as I can tell, this is not accurate. Last year's budget, which is available for all to view, allocated WI $23,000. This year's allocates $17,000. That is a decrease for sure, but not nearly one of 44%. Over the course of the past year, WI did receive funding on top of that initial $23,000, primarily from the additional funds the SG obtained from a higher than expected enrollment and the cancellation of the T-Pain concert. I can only assume that they are comparing their total allocation from last year to this year's budget, which is unreasonable. If additional funds become available again, there is no reason that WI wouldn't be able to apply for them again. But to expect the budget to go above and beyond what they were originally allocated a year ago is based on a comparison of apples to oranges.

That said, this budget still does decrease their funding by $6,000. While that may not be 44%, it is still significant. In my opinion, however, it is justified. The SG has created a new transportation subsidy, and the bike lending program will now have its own budget. These are great programs, and the money for them had to come from somewhere. There are many programs and accounts that will see a decrease in their funding in this year's budget.

Women's Initiative is surely one of the most active and successful of the SG departments. But they are still an SG department, nothing more. Therefore, they must learn to live within the financial constraints of being a part of the SG.

I have no doubt, however, that they will fight for every penny, and it should be a great spectacle on Sunday.

I am still waiting on Women's Initiative to provide a comment of some kind.

Cabinet Nominations

2010-04-16T12:07:00.002-04:00

It is that time of the year again. Exciting, no? Here are some of the interesting selections that the executives-elect have chosen to run the SG next year:

Anthony Dunham, Chair of the Judicial Board (not a "cabinet" position, but a very nice choice nonetheless)

Quinn Pregliasco, Director of Women's Initiative

Ben Schorr, Director of Founder's Week (I would say that the bar has been set pretty low for you)

Josh Levitt, Director of KPU

Greg Cornell, Director of SUB

Eagle Fail

2010-04-14T14:33:00.002-04:00

I often criticize The Eagle. Overall I actually think it is a pretty good college newspaper. I just feel like they do a crappy job of covering things that happen right here on campus sometimes.

The most recent example can be found with Monday's issue. On Sunday, the Undergraduate Senate elected a new Speaker, passed a bill that will require Senators to hold weekly office hours, and introduced a budget that cuts the funding of Women's Initiative. To my knowledge, no reporters from The Eagle were at the meeting, and no mention of any of this could be found in the next day's paper.

I know it is just the SG, and people don't really care. But do people really care about this? Or this? It is true that the SG needs to do more to make themselves relevant to students. But The Eagle could certainly do a better job of paying attention.

In an editorial last year, they wrote, "Students should realize that change can start right here on campus." As soon as you realize it, maybe everyone else will, too.

A note on the above poll

2010-04-11T23:09:00.003-04:00

Apparently, it is not actually fair to say that WI's budget would be "cut in half." Last year, they were only allocated $23,000 in the original budget, not $30,000 (as previously reported). The rest of the money came from supplemental allocations. So, in fact, the proposed budget "only" cuts their funding by $6,000.

UPDATE: The "above poll" is no longer there. So don't worry about it.

Eric Reath is the new Speaker

2010-04-11T17:08:00.003-04:00

He got 11 votes. Anthony Dunham and Douglas Bell each got 3. So that is that.

The budget will be taken up next week, so that should be exciting. See you later.

The candidates for Speaker

2010-04-11T16:09:00.005-04:00

Each candidate had five minutes to speak to the Senate, and then each took questions.

Anthony Dunham: He is still not back yet, but he is presenting via Skype. This is perhaps a first in the history of the Senate. He says, "I believe in the Undergraduate Senate." Says that he has been at nearly every Senate meeting, as a member of the public. Has served as Parliamentarian and Speaker before. "I have been tried in the fires of experience." Says he's fully versed in governing documents, has worked to improve the SG, and has experience advocating on behalf of the Senate.

Eric Reath: Quotes Tom Daschle. Will be as open and available to Senate as possible. Will work on improving communication between Senate and campus media. Wants to ensure meeting packets distributed on time, and that meetings run smoothly.

Douglas Bell: Feels that new leadership is needed to move beyond personal politics. He quotes the part of my blog that says SG is a "useless collection of people pretending to be important." He responds, "That's not who we are!" Wants a more important role for committees. Will take a more active role in increasing communication and transparency. Will donate 6-8 hours per week in office hours. He has no political aspirations beyond this. Strong record of being impartial and active.

The Senate will now debate and vote by secret ballot.

So much for the time limit

2010-04-11T15:22:00.004-04:00

The Senate has overturned Senator Rosenstein's resolution that would limit Senate meetings to 2.5 hours. We could be here for days.

Also, if you're interested in another perspective on today's meeting, check out Gertold Hasanbelliu's live tweeting.

Delay

2010-04-11T14:58:00.003-04:00

Nevermind about a new Speaker being elected soon. Anthony Dunham is flying in from somewhere, and is delayed. Therefore, the election will be moved until later in the meeting.

Interestingly enough, Senate meetings are now limited to two and a half hours, thanks to a resolution by Seth Rosenstein.

The budget debate

2010-04-11T14:52:00.004-04:00

The Senate is underway. The election of a new Speaker will take place very soon.

It seems that the other fight of interest will be over the budget. The SG's newly proposed budget significantly cuts the budget of Women's Initiative. The argument is that the new women's resource center is taking up a significant amount of student funds, and that WI should suffer because of it. Director of WI Sarah Brown and others are here to fight for the money that the usually get.

Last year, they received $30,000. This year, the proposed budget allocates them $17,000.

Tomorrow: The election of a new Speaker

2010-04-10T16:20:00.002-04:00

Tomorrow afternoon, the Senate will elect a new Speaker. Parliamentarian Douglas Bell, Senator Eric Reath, and former Speaker and Presidential candidate Anthony Dunham are rumored to be considering running for the position. Members of the Senate will elect the new Speaker by secret ballot.

I have no life, it's true. So I'll be there to report back to you. The session gets started at 2:30.

Andy MacCracken featured on washingtonpost.com

2010-04-06T14:15:00.002-04:00

Check out the interview here. My favorite part? This part, referring to the campaign last year:

The biggest flop stemmed from my previous SG involvement. Our campus media tend to have a watchdog complex, so when it came time for endorsements, I was bashed for simply being associated with the SG rather than anything that the SG or I had done wrong.

That was fun. I would disagree slightly, however. I don't think he was bashed "for simply being associated with the SG rather than anything the SG...had done wrong." In fact, I believe he (and the SG) were "bashed" because they didn't do anything at all. To have done something wrong would have required them to have actually been active in some way. Most students didn't feel like they were. Also, I heard there was another candidate running that was just a little bit better than Andy.

Tonight's Forum

2010-04-05T18:13:00.003-04:00

SOC Professor John Watson is holding a forum right now to discuss The Eagle's recent controversy. I will not be attending, because I don't really care. If you're interested, The Eagle is live tweeting. If you're there, feel free to share your thoughts.

The Future

2010-04-02T13:25:00.002-04:00

I am graduating in 37 days (thank goodness), and unfortunately I will have no desire to continue this blog at that time. Most likely it will be retired (and then what will you do for fun?). However, if there was somebody that wanted to carry the torch going forward, I wouldn't mind leaving the blog to somebody else. If you think you might be such a person (whether you are a member of the SG or not), please let me know.

BREAKING: Zack Solomon to serve as Vice President

2010-04-01T13:04:00.002-04:00

In the wake of VP Prescott's suspension, the SG's Director of Athletics and Recreation, Zack Solomon, has been tapped to fill in for the remainder of the year. President MacCracken said that "although he is clearly unqualified for the job, he will definitely do a better job than Colin Meiselman would have."

Solomon ran for President last year on a ticket with Prescott. When asked what he thought about the selection of Solomon to take over for him, Prescott said, "Who is Zack Solomon?"

Solomon himself could not be reached for comment. His publicist informed me that he was busy watching the Jets game. Apparently, he was unaware that the Jets do not play in April.

My other post earlier today was certainly not an April Fools' joke. This one might be.

Things that are getting lost in the fire

2010-04-01T12:22:00.004-04:00

With all of the hoopla surrounding that column, it seems like everyone has forgotten about everything else that goes on at this school.

For example, the outrage over the loss of a Founder's Day Ball has completely disappeared. People seem to have lost interest in the fact that the SG just took the unprecedented step of suspending the Vice President, with pay, by secret ballot. Nobody even noticed that the Speaker of the Undergraduate Senate just resigned. All that election drama feels like it was years ago. And the Senate is holding a special session tonight to try and override a bill that President MacCracken vetoed.

You wouldn't know it from reading The Eagle, but there is a lot of stuff going on. And it is being missed while everyone is busy making the kid who wrote the column the most famous AU student since, well, ever.

The last blog post I will ever write about that stupid Eagle column (probably)

2010-03-30T23:17:00.002-04:00

I keep saying that people should stop giving him attention. So this will hopefully be the last time that I do. I just wanted to quickly point you to a pretty good piece by Jordan Boyd on the topic:

Those outside of the AU community can’t really appreciate the symbiotic relationship between Knepper and the activist community. Every few months, he writes an offensive column to piss off women, gays, and liberals. Then the activists get riled up. Knepper gets media attention and self-satisfaction, while the activists get to pretend that they’ve done something important by bitching about it. And the campus community gets to sit back and watch in awe at the lunacy that unfolds in front of us.

Stop paying attention to Alex Knepper

2010-03-30T15:05:00.002-04:00

Are you angry about what he wrote in The Eagle? Well, this should make you a lot more angry: imagine him sitting back with his feet up, and a big smile on his face, absolutely loving every second of all this nonsense. He obviously only wanted attention, and thanks to those of you that have decided to make this the biggest news story to hit AU since Ben Ladner, he's getting it.

He posts all of the news stories that are written about him to his Facebook wall. He goes around commenting on other people's Facebook walls when they say something about him. In his wildest dreams, he could not have possibly hoped to have gained this much attention. Now that he has, he probably feels like the most important person in the world. Is that really what you wanted?

All of the anger and the outrage over what he wrote has overlooked a simple fact: this idiot is irrelevant. Nobody reads his columns (unless you make a big deal out of them), and nobody cares what he has to say. If he ever realized that, it would be much more crushing to him than any insults his detractors could ever throw at him. By making him a celebrity, you have fallen into his trap. This is exactly what he wanted.

You should donate to CERF today

2010-03-30T12:16:00.002-04:00

Regardless of where you stood on the referendum, surely you can agree that the Clean Energy Revolving Fund is a great thing for our university. It came directly as a result of student leadership right here on campus. It will raise the public profile of AU, and will ensure that we do our part in the fight to make our country energy independent.

Although the referendum passed, there is no guarantee that the fee that was advocated for will ever be implemented. It is up to us, the students, to get CERF off the ground. If you support clean energy, it is time to put your money where your mouth is.

No matter how much you can afford, whether it is $5 or $100, every little bit helps. To donate, click here. Then follow these instructions:
1. Under Area/School select "University Initiatives"
2. Under Fund select "Clean Energy Revolving Fund"
3. Enter your information

CERF will help AU become a leader in the field of sustainability, and will make your degree more valuable. Please consider making a donation today.

Final Election Notes

2010-03-29T18:03:00.002-04:00

Tired of discussing the recent SG election yet? I am ready to move on, but there are a few remainders I wanted to mention.

First, the strange Bronstein emailer is back. Remember when somebody sent out an email on behalf of Nate's campaign from a mysterious email address? Well, recipients got another email today:

Thank you for electing Nate Bronstein!
I knew we could do it.

Very strange. I am pretty curious about who was behind this. But not so curious that I will devote any more thought to it.

Also, I want to commend former Acting Chair of the BOE Bikram Kohli on his efforts to persuade the Senate to do a better job of coming up with regulations for the elections. In an email, he said:

As my last act before resuming my duties as Secretary of the Board of Elections, I petition the Senate to do a complete overview (preferably, overhaul) of the Election Regulations and relevant portions of the By-laws. I request that the Elections Oversight Committee be tasked with the job of coming up with a set of Election Regulations that are not vague and unclear. I also petition that a member of the Board be part of this Committee to provide valuable input and suggestion seeing, as the one tasked with upholding the Regulations, the Board is best suited to articulate the difficulties related to the elections process.

I plan to propose my own solutions for what should be changed at some point.

More Eagle controversy

2010-03-29T12:26:00.005-04:00

Alex Knepper's most recent column has caused more controversy. Here's a quick sample (I apologize for the messed up spacing):

Let's get this straight: any woman who head to an EI party as an anonymous
onlooker, drinks five cups of the jungle juice, and walks back to a boy's room
with him is indicating that she wants sex, OK? To cry "date rape" after you
sober up the next morning and regret the incident is the equivalent of pulling a
gun to someone's head and then later claiming that you didn't ever actually
intend to pull the trigger.

Now, this kid is clearly a moron. The nonsense that he espouses in most of his columns proves that. He likes to cause as much controversy as possible, because he wants attention.

And it works, because he gets the attention that he craves. This morning, somebody removed all of the newspapers from one of their stands and hung a sign that read, "No Room for Rape Apologists." See a picture here.

So there you have it. One idiot writes an offensive column, another retaliates in an unecessary and immature fashion. It is safe to say that civility has not yet returned to our campus' politics.

Perspective?

2010-03-28T22:47:00.005-04:00

In a fresh editorial, The Eagle says that "the loss of the Founder's Day Ball is truly tragic."

Come on guys, I know you're disappointed. But in the long list of things that are messed up in the world, I am not sure that this one qualifies as being "truly tragic." Nobody died. Nobody even got hurt. It just means that you won't have a ball to go to. Oh well. Life will go on.

UPDATE: Ethan Klapper comments on this post:

The version up on the Web site was not the final version of this editorial. The final version will be in tomorrow's paper and won't use this language.

The editorial now reads that the loss of Founder's Day is "rather disappointing." Much better. Apparently the reaches of my influence are limitless.

A Recap of the Madness

2010-03-28T20:17:00.003-04:00

Michigan State and Duke are headed to the Final Four. Unfortunately, that is not the madness of which I speak. Today's Senate meeting was quite memorable. I will touch upon all of the issues in the order that they happened.

First, there was the suspension of VP Alex Prescott. This was the first time the Senate has ever done something like this, as it was not allowed until a bill was passed last week. I understand why the Senate was frustrated. All students are frustrated with a lack of Founder's Day, and other aspects of the programming this year. However, I thought the the VP was deserving of a break here. The action taken by the Senate is a sufficient punishment, but it does not do anything to improve programming. They are throwing the job upon Colin, who has been doing completely different work as Secretary all year. I can't imagine that the programming will be any better next month with Prescott staying away. The Senate felt that it was more important to make a point and punish Prescott personally, regardless of what it meant for the students and the programming that they receive.

Then, there was the certification of the election. I agree with the majority of the Senate that to have not certified the entire election would have been somewhat insane. It would have been unfair to all of the candidates, most of whom participated in fair elections. However, the Senate had an opportunity to single out the Presidential election. It is very hard for me to comprehend the argument that they consistently made, which was that regardless of whether or not the election was fair, holding another one would be too hard, or look silly, or whatever. And as one Senator put it, "I don't care if the election was fair." Well, you may not, but I do. As one of a small handful of students at AU that is not part of the SG but still cares about what goes on inside of it, I certainly care about whether or not the election was fair.

There is another argument to be made in favor of certification, which Bikram made to me, which is that it would be pointless to hold another election under the same rules which are so blatantly flawed. That is a much more logical point than the ones made by the majority of the Senate. However, I would still have been in favor of doing the Presidential election again. I just cannot get beyond the fact that two candidates did the same thing wrong, and were punished completely differently. And even if there was nothing that could be done to Nate, throwing Nirvana off the ballot was a huge overreaction. Every other candidate that committed a violation was given a chance to correct it. Nirvana was not. Again, I point to precedent: I hung a banner on the parking garage last year. Lots of people saw it, and there was no way to change (or "correct") that, but I was not punished. How is Nirvana's punishment even close to fair? Undergraduate Senate, apparently you don't care what was fair (you actually said as much), or what was right. You care about what is easy. Which is why the only reason that most of you are there is because you were able to run unopposed. To actually earn your seat would have been far too difficult for you.

Most importantly though, election reform is needed. Bikram is making a valiant effort to do that, and I will have more on that tomorrow.

Finally, Speaker Merkwae resigned as Speaker of the Senate. She did so with the following email:

I hereby resign from my position as Speaker of the Undergraduate Senate. I can no longer associate my name with an organization that chooses convenience over ethical conduct.
As my boy Martin Luther King Jr. would say, "The ultimate measure of a person is not where they stand in moments of comfort and convenience, but where they stand in times of challenge and controversy."

Some suggested that the debate over election certification was all about personal interest. Certainly the Speaker was a supporter of Nirvana's campaign, as were most of those that spoke in her defense. I was not. I voted for Seth. But regardless of who I supported, I can still see how ridiculous this process was. I would hope that anybody outside of the SG bubble would still possess enough common sense to be able to as well.

And this should in no way tarnish the victory of Nate Bronstein. If I haven't been clear enough, let me do so now: he was a great candidate, and will be a great President. Anybody that knows him would agree. That is not at all what this is about.

This is about a broken system, and a failed process. And I sincerely question whether or not the people that are in a position to do something about it are capable. Hopefully they will prove me wrong.

Public Comment, Round Two

2010-03-28T18:41:00.002-04:00

-Clerk Erin Waters criticizes the Senate for the general lack of civility during the entire debate. A sound point.

-Emily Beyer criticizes the Senate for certifying the Presidential election results. She claims that the arguments against decertification were not at all legitimate. Claims that the body did "what was easy instead of what was right."

-Jose Morales also criticizes the civility of the body, and expresses his disappointment with their approval of the election.

-Suspended VP Prescott says that he feels disrespected by the process that resulted in his suspension. He implores the Senate to consider the suspension process (which was only created last week). "Thank you guys for paying me for not being able to enter the office."

-Anthony Dunham also criticizes the Senate for being too egotistical and failing to focus on the issues, and for failing to work with the executives.

Also, Amanda Merkwae has resigned as Speaker.

What a day. More later.

The Senate certifies the election results

2010-03-28T18:34:00.002-04:00

By a vote of 10-9 (only 1/3 was needed), the Senate has certified the election results, making Nate Bronstein the official President-elect of the AUSG. All official avenues that could be pursued by Nirvana's campaign would seem to be exhausted.

I have many thoughts, but I am also really hungry, so I am not going to share them just now. I would encourage you check back later tonight to read all of my thoughts on the entire day, which was obviously very eventful. See you then.

The Senate fails to decertify pres. election results

2010-03-28T18:19:00.002-04:00

By a vote of 7-12 (a 3/4 majority was needed), the Senate failed to reach the total needed to decertify the Presidential election results.

The full election results still need to be certified, and that debate will take place now. This will be the last chance for Nirvana's campaign.

The Debate

2010-03-28T17:49:00.002-04:00

It seems that my earlier observation was correct: it is really hard to argue that the election was fair. Those in favor of certification are arguing purely on logistics. They say that it would be difficult to hold another election, as there is no precedence. The problem with this, of course, is that they are basically acknowledging that it was unfair.

Bikram Kohli presents to the Senate

2010-03-28T17:22:00.004-04:00

Three hours after Emily, Meg, and Amanda presented their case for why the Senate should not certify the results, the acting chair of the BOE, Bikram Kohli presented the results of the election to the Senate.

He says that it is his opinion that the "processes as outlined under the election regulations were duly carried out," but that he personally finds the regulations "unfair."

The Senate will now debate, needing a 2/3 vote to vote against certification of the entire thing, or 3/4 to vote against certifying a single race.

Prescott suspended until April 25, Meiselman to take over

2010-03-28T16:09:00.006-04:00

During debate, it seemed as though the sentiment of the body was leaning towards giving the VP a break. They then took a ten minute recess, and apparently some minds were changed. Not only am I surprised that he ended up being suspended, I am also surprised that the vote was not all that close. The vote was 12-4, with three Senators abstaining. The fact that it was a secret ballot annoyed many of Prescott's supporters that were in the room.

After the vote, Prescott left the room. He returned moments later, looking visibly angry, to gather his things. He was understandably very upset by the decision.

It will be interesting to see how the SG moves forward from this. Colin Meiselman will be acting as the VP, and an acting Secretary will now likely have to be appointed (although that is yet to be determined).

The debate on the election certification has been moved to the end of the meeting, so there will be a bunch of other nonsensical SG debate on various bills first. If any of them are of interest, I will let you know. But stay tuned as we're just getting started here. This election debate will be fun.

Prescott Suspended

2010-03-28T16:00:00.003-04:00

By a vote of 12-4-3, the VP is suspended. Secretary Collin Meiselman will act in his place. I am a little surprised that this just happened. The vote was taken by a secret ballot.

Senate attempts to suspend the VP

2010-03-28T15:19:00.004-04:00

In his presentation, Prescott claims that SA was not willing to put in the extra effort necessary to make the event happen. He also informs us that his Director of Founder's Day Director has had personal issues that have prevented her from doing her job.

At the end of his presentation, Senator Eric Reath moved to suspend VP Prescott for the month of April. He claims that the students have not received adequate programming this year, and that the students deserve quality programming in the month of April. Senator Reath had five minutes to present his case.

The VP then got five minutes to defend himself. He reiterates the fact that his Director of Founder's Day was not an asset. He also totes some of the initiatives that he has been working on, and continues to blame Student Activities. He also feels that suspending him will not help the students in any way. It's a fair point.

He is feisty. I like it. "If the Breastival didn't happen, would Andy be up for suspension?"

The Senate will now enter a period of debate, and then vote on the motion. Only a majority vote is needed to suspend.

Speaker Merkwae criticizes BOE

2010-03-28T14:50:00.002-04:00

The Speaker is not presiding over this meeting, and has not been for the last couple of weeks to prevent any conflict of interest, as she is a supporter of Nirvana's campaign.

Today, she followed Emily and Meg by questioning the entire process that the BOE undertook in their decision making process. She claims that they did not follow an appropriate timeline throughout the entire process.

I can't really see how anybody could call this election fair, although I've been saying that forever now. It is just a question of whether or not the Senate has the balls to do something about it.

In a moment, we will move to the VP's presentation, then come back to the issue of elections.

Public Comment

2010-03-28T14:39:00.002-04:00

Emily Beyer opens up the meeting by doing a great job of stating the case for why the election should not be certified, on behalf of Nirvana. She points to the most obvious reason: the fact that Nate's campaign did the exact same thing and was not punished.

She was followed by Senator Megan Miraglia, who provided further reasoning. She points to the incompetency of the BOE. She questions how the rule is actually written, and argues that the rule only applies to something the candidate herself does (in this case, it was Meg and Emily, not Nirvana, that broke the rule). Lastly, she claims that the punishment was unprecedented and far too harsh, and that the Judicial Board did not act properly in their appeal hearing.

So far, their arguments are well coordinated, and persuasive.

Preview of Today's Senate Meeting

2010-03-28T13:19:00.002-04:00

I haven't actually been to one of these things in a while, so I'm looking forward to it. The fun begins at 2:30, so check back throughout the day for updates.

Two things that should be pretty exciting:

1. The Vice President. He will be there, presenting and taking questions. It will be interesting to see how tough the Senate is on him, and how good his answers are.

2. The certification of the election. As Bobby Oler pointed out in the comments section, the rules for not certifying the election or tough. Two thirds need to vote against certification, and if that happens, it would all happen again. The senate can also nullify the results of a single race, but that requires a 3/4 vote. Both of those will be tough numbers to get to, but there is certainly a case to be made. I believe the Chair of the BOE will also be there to take questions, so that could be good fun.

Like I said, if you can't make it to the circus to see it for yourself, just keep refreshing this page.

Meiselman: "I don't think you could find a rational person who would say that Prescott didn't drop the ball."

2010-03-27T16:08:00.002-04:00

Get it? He dropped the ball.

Anyways, it would seem as though most of the blame for the lack of a Founder's Day Ball is being placed at the feet of the Vice President. He was the one responsible for planning it, and even though he created a new cabinet position at the start of the year, Director of Founder's Day, it isn't going to happen. Apparently Jenny Kim and Riley Fujisaki made a valiant effort to save the event, but they were denied the opportunity by Student Activities. The Examiner's account of events is here.

Obviously this a huge disappointment for people that were looking forward to the ball, especially those of us that are seniors. Students don't expect much from the SG, but this sets a new low. Even if it was ultimately SA that prevented the last minute effort to hold a ball, the fact that it is not happening does not reflect well upon the SG. And this all comes at a time when the SG is not viewed very highly by anyone.

What happens now? Well, it is going to be an interesting meeting in the Senate tomorrow. Not only will the issue of election certification be on the table, but the VP will have to face his critics. It should at least make for some interesting debate. It will all go down tomorrow at 2:30, and I'll be there to tell you about it.

Founder's Day Ball: Cancelled

2010-03-27T01:15:00.000-04:00

Share your thoughts/concerns/frustrations here.

Drew Veysey criticizes The Eagle for printing "semi-libelous" story

2010-03-26T15:22:00.005-04:00

Remember that article that talked about Steve Dalton's encounter with some eco-warriors at Chipotle? Well Drew is pissed about it. "It's a gossip story that involved no investigation," he told me. "[They're] just essentially reprinting what Steve and Colin [Meiselman] said."

Drew also said that he personally looked into the matter, and tried to get a description of the offenders from Dalton, but got no response. As far as he can tell, these individuals were not actually members of Eco-Sense, and he feels that it is unfair that The Eagle (and myself) assumed that they were without talking to anybody in Eco-Sense.

And I kind of agree with Drew that it is a little silly that this story got more prominent placement than did the one about the CERF Referendum passing by a large margin.

However, there is also a larger point here about the importance of civility in politics. Whether it be here on campus, or in the halls of Congress, we ought to be able to disagree without resorting to petty name-calling and smearing. Steve Dalton is not a bad guy because he opposed the CERF Referendum, just like healthcare reform is not socialism. Let's strive for less rhetoric and more constructive debate.

UPDATE: Dalton's statement:

I guess Drew thinks that I should have asked for their AUID numbers after they told me that 'my day would come;' if it happens again I will be sure to do just that. I didn't make up what happened, and I spoke with Stephen Bronskill and Jennifer Jones of EcoSense more than once to tell them that I don't think this was some EcoSense plot. This is yet another example of the loss of civility in our elections.

The next step: Will the Senate certify the election results?

2010-03-25T18:15:00.003-04:00

The results from the recent election must now be certified by the Senate. They will take up the issue this Sunday.

As you know, I think that this election was blatantly unfair. Nirvana Habash's friend sent out an email that she shouldn't have, and she was disqualified. Then she was un-disqualified, but kept off the ballot and forced to run as a write-in. Nate Bronstein's friend sent out an email that she shouldn't have, and he was not punished at all. He won, Nirvana came in third, about 200 votes behind.

Would the results have been different if Nirvana had been allowed to remain on the ballot? I suppose we'll never know. It seems certain that she would have at least received a few more votes, but I don't know if she would have made up the 200. However, she would have had more time to campaign if she wasn't busy dealing with all of the crap the BOE was giving her.

The more interesting question is: What would have happened if Nate were also thrown off the ballot? Would he still have won? Would Anthony Dunham have won?

These are questions the Senate must consider this Sunday. If they chose to not certify the results, there would have to be another election, and the logistics of that would be a nightmare. But, there is no doubt that there are some very serious concerns about the way this election was conducted. It should be an interesting meeting on Sunday.

Notes

2010-03-25T12:22:00.002-04:00

-Now that the election is over, we are going back to allowing anonymous comments. Just like the old days!

-Apparently Steve Dalton and Eco-Sense almost threw punches. At Chipotle.

-Seriously, if you haven't checked out Jake and Amy's Twitter page, do it now.

-Up until last year, every candidate for President that The Eagle had ever endorsed went on to win. They are now on a two year losing streak.

It. Is. Over.

2010-03-25T00:24:00.004-04:00

First off, congratulations to Kent and Ed. Their victories shouldn't have come as much of a surprise (although Jake and Ashley ran excellent campaigns for Secretary), and they will both do a great job.

I would also like to point out that nobody (including myself) was able to correctly guess all of the winners, mostly because very few of us expected Maia Tagami to win VP. She was my candidate of choice, and I am glad that she won. This was the closest of the elections, and I will go ahead and suggest that it was my endorsement that put her over the top.

The CERF Referendum dominated, although I kind of expected that. Drew Veysey is calling it an "irresistible mandate." One of my friends was quick to point out that it should not be confused Brad Pitt, the "irresistible man date." Get it?

Finally, my candidate of choice finished dead last in the race for the Presidency. Seth would have shaken things up, and I think that it is unfortunate that he won't get that chance. It is very difficult to run against the establishment when the establishment itself represents such a large voting block.

That said, huge kudos to the new AUSG President, Nate Bronstein. He had to defeat an incredibly impressive field, and he earned his victory. He will make a good President, and the students here will definitely have a very capable and impressive leader on their side next year.

Tonight should be about him and his victory. But at some point, the question will have to be asked: what would have been different if Nirvana were on the ballot? She ended up finishing third, about 200 votes behind Nate. Not bad for a write-in campaign, and I think that there will be some people (including myself) that will spend the next couple of days wondering how she might have done with her name on the ballot (as it should have been), or if Nate's name weren't on the ballot.

ALSO: If you want some election analysis that is actually good, check out Amy Chin and Jake Paul's Twitter page. Hilarious.

My Predictions

2010-03-24T17:00:00.002-04:00

Voting is closed. Here's who I think will win (of course, I also picked Kansas):

President: Nate

VP: Jenny Kim

Comptroller: Ed

Secretary: Kent

CERF: Yes

We'll know the results in about four hours. I'll have my full analysis later tonight.

What counts as a vote for Nirvana?

2010-03-24T15:28:00.002-04:00

As you may be aware, Nirvana Habash is running as a write-in candidate. Steve Dalton pointed out an interesting question to me today: Does it count if they spell her name wrong?

Would a vote for "Nervana Habash" be counted? What about "Nirvana Habish?" What if they only put her first name? What if they only put her last name?

There are a lot of variables here that could make this even more interesting.

Remember: Polls close at 5 pm, so if you have not done so already, vote now.

Predictions?

2010-03-23T23:10:00.002-04:00

Let's play a game. Shoot me an email with answers to the following questions:

1. Which four candidates do you think WILL (not should) win the executive positions?

2. Do you think the CERF referendum will pass?

Whoever gets the most correct will be the winner(s). I will post their names on Thursday. Depending on how many there are, there could be other prizes.

The email is michael.mayer[at]american.edu.

Voting is back up

2010-03-23T22:07:00.000-04:00

That is what I hear. I am also blogging from my phone right now, that's how dedicated I am.

Problems with Voting

2010-03-23T19:47:00.005-04:00

I thought it would be a nice, quiet day on the election front. No campaigning, no problems. I was wrong.

About two hours ago, the chair of the BOE said via Twitter that the link for voting on my.american.edu wasn't showing up for some people, making it impossible for them to vote. He followed up by saying that the Office of Information Technology was looking into it, and that anybody having issues voting should call them at 202.885.2550.

However, some very quick investigation seems to suggest that OIT is not around and this point in the evening, thus leading me to believe that the problem may not be fixed anytime soon.

Even if the problem gets fixed, this could have the potential to taint the results of the election, depending on how many people experienced this issue.

This type of thing seems to always come up. I remember last year that Andy's name didn't appear on the ballot in the morning or something silly like that.

I voted!

2010-03-23T12:14:00.003-04:00

Have you? You should: http://my.american.edu. Log in, and click on the blue link that says "2010-2011 Student Government and RHA Officer Elections." Be sure to click all of the way through to the end!

As a reminder, here's who I voted for:

President- Seth Rosenstein

Vice President- Maia Tagami

Comptroller- Ed Levandoski

Secretary- Kent Hiebel

CERF Referendum- Yes

Final thoughts before voting begins

2010-03-23T00:44:00.003-04:00

Voting starts at 9 am! Log onto your my.american portal to cast your vote either tomorrow or Wednesday before 5 pm.

Here are some things I want to mention before it all begins:

Endorsements: Many more have come out in the past 24 hours. I would like to congratulate Seth Rosenstein, since he is my candidate of choice, on receiving the endorsement of the President of the Undergraduate Business Association. Alexander Feld is not exactly Mike Mayer, but that is not a bad one to pick up. Also, the lion himself, Steve Dalton, endorsed Anthony Dunham. I would say that, after me, that is the second most important endorsement you can pick up. Apparently The Eagle endorsed him too. Probably a bad sign, I hear they are on a bit of a losing streak.

BOE Regulations: They are absolutely unbelievably stupid. At some point I will write a very lengthy post about how ridiculous some of them are. Apparently, you can't send any email, to anyone, on behalf of a candidate. So if I were running, I couldn't email my friends, from my personal address book, to remind them to vote.

If Nirvana loses in a close election, that would be an absolute disaster. The fact that she is not on the ballot is so incredibly annoying. If she comes in second by a few votes as a write-in, you could easily say that the incompetence of the BOE and Judicial Board cost her the election. Not only does she miss out on being President, she misses out on the $8,500 that comes with the job. And, the Senate might then have good reason to not certify the results, and what a shitstorm that would be.

I think I am beginning to lose my hair.

CORRECTION: This post previously stated that the President earns $10,000 rather than $8,500. That is wrong.

Reason #2 that I am Supporting the CERF Referendum

2010-03-22T23:46:00.001-04:00

This picture says it all my friends.

Why I am supporting the CERF referendum

2010-03-22T16:41:00.004-04:00

If you know anything about me, you probably assumed that this would be a no-brainer. It wasn't. I have wrestled with the issue for a week now. At one point, I was absolutely convinced that I would vote against this referendum. I simply didn't see how you could justify increasing the student activity fee by $10 to fund something that is not a student activity.

But today, I am proud to announce my support for this referendum. If you are still on the fence, allow me just a moment to explain my reasoning.

First off, the referendum doesn't actually call for an increase in the student activity fee (as some opponents have suggested), but rather an increase in "student fees." It would therefore stand to reason that, if implemented, this $10 fee would be applied separately, just like, say, the $65 fee we are charged for Jacobs Fitness Center. If you want to get really upset about fees, where is the outrage over the $73.50 we pay in student activity fees, much of which is wasted by the student government? The SG has a budget of around $600,000, yet when was the last time we had a concert in Bender? How was the Founder's Day Ball this year? Who was the last big speaker that KPU brought to campus?

Despite this large chunk of money, the SG refused to contribute any of it to CERF, despite the fact that it is an SG initiative. Steve Dalton refutes the point that CERF has anything to do with the SG, but I must respectfully disagree with the lion on this one. CERF was created by Andy MacCracken (President) and Drew Veysey (Director of Env. Policy), both of whom are in the SG. It was also initially supported by a bill that was passed in the Undergraduate Senate (which I co-sponsored). Had the SG not refused to fund its own program, this referendum might not have been necessary. Drew, and others (especially Eco-Sense), have done a great job of raising funds so far. But the faster we can get the funding for CERF going, the faster it can start being an asset to our school.

Opponents are also quick to cry foul at any increase to the already outrageously high cost of attending American University. To them, I say politely: It is ten fucking dollars. I understand that it is more about principal, but $10 is nothing compared to the other fees that we are paying. I am not one of those spoiled, rich AU kids. But anybody that can afford to be here can afford another $10 on top of their tuition, especially if it means helping our campus become more sustainable. Ultimately, that is what CERF will do, and that will make our school more respectable, and thus make your degree more valuable.

We have a great opportunity to send a message that our campus is committed to protecting our economic security, national security, and our planet. If you support a future that is powered by something other than fossil fuels, it is essential that you vote for the CERF referendum tomorrow.

EXCLUSIVE: Senior SG Official Confirms that Complaints Against Bronstein Campaign are Accurate

2010-03-22T00:20:00.005-04:00

First, there was that silly email that was sent out to random people on behalf of Nate Bronstein. It was most likely a hoax of some kind, and the BOE did not punish Nate's campaign for it. Then, a more serious charge that someone sent out an email on behalf of Nate to the listserv of Delta Gamma. This was nearly identical to the charge that got Nirvana Habash thrown off the ballot. However, the BOE ruled that they could not do anything about it, because they could not obtain an original copy of the email.

Earlier tonight, however, a senior SG official (one that is not a member of the BOE) confirmed that they had seen an original copy of the email, and that the charges were accurate. It was sent to the Delta Gamma listserv, and encouraged a vote for Nate Bronstein. It was sent by a member of the sorority that is known to be a supporter of Nate. She was also the same person that filed the complaint against Nirvana's campaign for her email.

This seems pretty serious. How can the BOE justify removing Nirvana from the ballot, but not Nate, because of what is essentially a technicality? The answer, in my opinion, would be to simply put Nirvana back on the ballot.

For President: Seth Rosenstein

2010-03-21T17:02:00.005-04:00

Despite some success by President MacCracken behind the scenes this year, students have never been more disengaged and annoyed by the Student Government than they are right now. Especially with the recent silliness surrounding the way elections are carried out, very few people at this university take the SG seriously. The organization needs fundamental change. Only one candidate promises to deliver that change: Seth Rosenstein.

This was, by far, the most difficult of the decisions to make. All four candidates have the potential to perform well. Nirvana Habash is a very personable leader, who wants nothing but the best for the students of American University. I truly hope that she is given a fair shot at winning. Nate Bronstein understands how the system works, and understands why students are frustrated with it. He is a very charismatic leader as well. Anthony Dunham understands the intricacies of the system better than anybody, and he is as fair minded of an individual that exists in the SG.

But each of these candidates is too quick to defend the current system. They all seem to believe that, if minor adjustments are made, students will suddenly become engaged. I'm afraid to say that I do not believe that to be the case. The SG needs a leader that is not afraid to shake things up, and one that isn't overly concerned with getting along with everyone. Seth deserves a chance to change things.

In their endorsements last year, The Eagle editorialized that "The SG needs more student participation and more student feedback- the campus-wide disinterest in student government proves that things need to be shaken up." That was true then, and it is even more true today. Why should we keep advancing the same people upward in the organization and expect a different result? Nate, Nirvana, and Anthony have all been in positions where they have had an opportunity to increase student engagement, and nothing changed. Seth brings with him enough experience to know what can be done and what needs to be done, but not so much experience that he has become ingrained in the system. As a Senator, he has been the most accessible to his constituents, holding regular office hours on campus. The bills that he has introduced have focused on issues that actually matter, from bike racks on campus to the price of parking. His idea to have 50% of his cabinet come from outside the SG may sound like a gimmick, but I actually believe that it would do wonders for the organization. And as the former Director of Recruitment, I know for a fact that there is enough interest out there to make this happen.

The SG needs fundamental change. Students don't care about it, and that is unfortunate, because we deserve to have robust representation to the powers that be. Seth understands this, and he is our best chance to lead the SG in a way that will make students want to be active and involved in what is going on right here on their own campus. At the beginning of all of this, I didn't plan to endorse anybody. But now, I truly believe that the SG needs to be changed. I know that many of you do as well. I hope that you will join me in supporting Seth Rosenstein on Tuesday or Wednesday.

For Vice President: Maia Tagami

2010-03-21T15:01:00.003-04:00

Once again, this was not at all an easy decision. There are three candidates that I really like for this spot. I know that there are four candidates on the ballot, but, like I said, there are three that I really like.

Amy Chin would make a very solid VP. She has had impressive experiences during her time at AU, and has a a good version for what her role would be. If she wins, students will not be disappointed in their programming next year.

I was also very intrigued by the candidacy Jeremiah Headen. He strikes me as a natural born leader who should definitely have a big role next year. Again, if he ends up winning, I think the position of SG VP will be in good hands.

But I feel that the best choice for this spot is Maia Tagami. She comes from outside the SG, and understands the frustrations that students have had with the organization in the past. But as the VP of College Democrats, she will certainly not be overwhelmed by this job. In fact, the difficulties that she has encountered in the past while trying to work with the SG give her an excellent perspective on some of the things that need to be changed. She has a great vision for the types of programming that students are looking for. The College Dems have done a great job with programming on their own this year, and I expect her to bring that same kind of success to the SG. I will enthusiastically be supporting Maia Tagami when I vote on Tuesday (or possibly Wednesday), and I hope you will do the same.

For Secretary: Kent Hiebel

2010-03-21T12:05:00.003-04:00

First of all, let me just say that I am so glad that such an impressive field decided to run for this position. Last year, there was one write-in candidate. This year, there were four excellent candidates, three of which remain in the race.

A quick word about Jake Paul and Ashley Kongs: I really do think that either of them would do a great job. They have the experience and the skills necessary to fit the position. In any other year, I could easily see myself endorsing either of them.

But this year, I plan to vote for Kent Hiebel. He is the current Communications Director for the SG, and he has done an outstanding job. How do I know that he has done such a good job? Because members of the SG are constantly emailing me telling me about him. Everyone that has worked with him raves about him. As only a freshman, he has become involved, earned responsibility, and performed very well. I think that experience is an overrated quality in SG candidates. While Kent certainly has experience, I am supporting him more for his energy, ability, and commitment to improving the Student Government. This Tuesday and Wednesday, I plan to cast my vote for Kent Hiebel to be the next SG Secretary. I would encourage you to do the same.

Yes, I plan to endorse some candidates

2010-03-21T03:47:00.002-04:00

I have finally made up my mind about who I will be voting for. Tomorrow (Sunday), I will let you know. Throughout the day, I will put up three separate posts that will make the case for the candidates that I think should be chosen as the next Secretary, Vice President, and President. I bet you can't wait.

Now this is what I am talking about

2010-03-20T17:38:00.003-04:00

Last night a posted a nice little rant about my frustrations with this election. More importantly, the candidates decided to share their thoughts in the comments section of that post. Finally, we get to see them actually engage each other and disagree on some points. Definitely worth a read.

Where do we go from here?

2010-03-20T11:29:00.003-04:00

We are still in the middle of this shitstorm, and somebody is going to have to step up and decide how we go forward and actually elect a President. The way I see it, there are a few options:

1. Some have suggested that the election be postponed, and started over. That is obviously the least preferable option.

2. The Eagle wants all of the candidates to run as write-ins. That would certainly make things fair, but getting all of the candidates to agree to do that would be impossible. And, since this mess isn't really their fault, they are not at all obligated to do so.

3. The BOE could just let Nirvana back on the ballot, and let us have our choice of all four candidates. Personally, this would be my choice.

4. We continue with the way things are now, with Nirvana running as a write-in and the other three candidates remaining on the ballot. This is probably the most likely to take place. But it doesn't seem fair at all for Nirvana to be off of the ballot for an email, and for Nate to remain on. Even if he had nothing to do with the email that was sent out (and I'm sure he didn't, because he could not be that stupid), it is a very similar situation to Nirvana's. Her controversial email was not sent out by the candidate either. Even though her friends admitted to sending it out, and Nate doesn't know who sent his (I'm guessing it wasn't anyone who was his friend), the basic "violation" seems very similar.

5. The BOE could kick Nate off the ballot, too. This would obviously be ridiculous, and I'm pretty sure it won't happen. But with the BOE, you just never know.

Another interesting question in all of this is whether or not there should be anything done about Anthony's alleged conversation with the former Chair of the BOE/JB about Nirvana's punishment. Does the blame for that fall solely on the former Chair (who obviously should have known better), or did Anthony need to do more to avoid the situation? Should he be punished in some way? Does this justify a return to the ballot for Nirvana?

The AU Democrats' Endorsements

2010-03-20T10:56:00.003-04:00

Following the College Republicans' endorsement of Seth Rosenstein a couple of days ago, the College Democrats have sent me their list of endorsements. They are one of the larger clubs on campus, and their endorsement is always highly coveted. They have decided to endorse Nate Bronstein for President (perhaps furthering his momentum), Maia Tagami for Vice President (she is also the VP of College Democrats), and Kent Heibel for Secretary.

Here is their full statement:

Presidency:
The American University College Democrats endorses Nate Bronstein for the Student Government Presidency. We believe that Nate Bronstein is best-suited to lead this campus into a new age.
In his capacity as Director of Outreach, Nate understands how the AUSG could help clubs, large or small. Nate has encouraged a deeper coordination between clubs and the general campus body. He has a history of bringing clubs together, and wants to encourage a culture of co-sponsorships. Our organization believes strongly in working with others, and are concerned that this campus is too divided and too fragmented. We needs initiatives like Nate’s idea to establish a committee that would coordinate activities between the Community Service Center and various service organizations on campus. Such cooperation would only serve to unite our student body.
For his unyielding belief in unity and his commitment to the campus’s many clubs and organizations, the American University College Democrats endorses Nate Bronstein for the AUSG Presidency.

Vice-Presidency:
The American University College Democrats endorses Maia Tagami for the Student Government Vice-Presidency. We believe that Maia Tagami is best-suited to bring efficiency and openness to the student government.
Maia’s proposals would introduce accountability and transparency into the government. She would push for a constitutional amendment to disclose all AUSG budgets in a public venue like the website. She would also hold monthly town halls with clubs and organizations, to get their input on anything from KPU Director nominations to how the AUSG could be more helpful. Such initiatives would clear up some of the fog that surrounds our government, and thus ensure that everyone will do their job to the best of their abilities.
We at AU Dems feel that the government is too opaque and inaccessible to the average student or club. Because of her policies concerning openness, disclosure, and accessibility, American University College Democrats endorses Maia Tagami for the AUSG Vice Presidency.

Secretary:
The American University College Democrats endorses Kent Hiebel for the Student Government Secretary. We believe that Kent Hiebel is best-suited to bring better communication to the student government.
In his current role as AUSG Communications Director, Kent understands the difficult realities of communicating to our large campus. But he has plans. Kent advocates the expansion of the bulletin boards, so that clubs can have more room to hang posters. Kent also wants a master calendar for the entire campus, so that clubs and organizations won’t overlap events. Finally, Kent would push for an AUCC newsletter, so that clubs, organizations, and regular students could understand the allocation process better, and so that they are made aware of what clubs they can join.
One of the biggest issues that clubs like ours face is communicating with AU students. We need an ally in the AUSG, someone who believes that the student government can be helpful to student organizations. For his innovative ideas and his deep understanding of communications, the American University College Democrats endorses Kent Hiebel for AUSG Secretary.

HEY I HAVE A GREAT IDEA

2010-03-20T02:12:00.003-04:00

This is absolutely the most ridiculous thing I have ever seen. The SG has spent more time analyzing emails in the last couple of days than they have spent improving the lives of AU students in their entire history. They are an absolute joke right now. Everybody who is part of the organization should be absolutely embarrassed. I am embarrassed that I waste my time paying attention.

Here's my idea: Let's stop talking about stupid emails, and let the candidates run. And let the students vote. The BOE is nothing but a waste of precious oxygen. Seriously, what kind of person would want something as arbitrary as a spot on the AUSG's Board of Elections? Four fine candidate have stepped up because they want to lead the SG. All we have seen since then is stupid bureaucracy by people that think they are important. Fuck it. Let them run, let us vote. And shut up.

If there were any students left that had any respect at all for the SG, they are gone. This sham "organization" can't even pull off an election. They don't deserve our respect.

The Eagle said it quite eloquently in their most recent editorial: "The SG has strayed ever further away from its mission to represent and advocate for the students of AU." I didn't think it was possible, but it is true.

Something needs to change. We, the student of American University, pay a ton of money to be here. We deserve robust student representation. Yet all that we have had in the entire time that I have been a student here is a bunch of SPA kids that will never be elected to any real office living out their dream of being significant in the AUSG.

What do you have for me, candidates? Are you in line with this system? Is this the AUSG you want representing us? I want to hear from you. Presumably, one of you will be in charge of this mess next year. What are you going to do about it?

I go to Chef Geoff's for an hour...

2010-03-19T19:41:00.004-04:00

...and I miss everything. Shit is hitting the fan left and right.

First, we have an email sent out to a bunch of email addresses (including some SPA listservs) in support of Nate Bronstein's campaign. It came from a mysterious email account, and it is unclear as to who sent it. Also unclear what the BOE will do about it. The email reads as follows:

Fellow American University Eagles,

In a few days we will have the opportunity to elect one of our very own students as our AUSG president.

I would like to take this time and let you know that Nate Bronstein is without a doubt the most qualified candidate for the position. He has the experience working in AUSG and he also has vision that will utilize the SG for the student population.

Nate Bronstein has been recently endorsed by current AUSG President Andy MacCracken and current Comptroller Alan Chang. This means a lot because these are individuals who actually have experience of what Nate would be doing if elected and believe that Nate Bronstein is the most qualified candidate out of the ones running.

It is without a doubt that Nate Bronstein deserves this chance to serve as our AUSG President. Remember to vote for him on March 23rd and March 24th on your my.american.edu portal!

Most sincerely,

A Fellow American University Eagle

We also have Nirvana Habash sending a letter to the Director of Student Activities alleging misconduct on the part of BOE Chairwoman Erica Zois. The Eagle has the story.

This has become far too ridiculous for me to deal with right now. It is Friday, I am on my way to drink a large number of beers. I will update with more thoughts tomorrow.

MacCracken Endorses Bronstein

2010-03-19T01:10:00.003-04:00

This is not unexpected, but is significant nonetheless. I would venture to say that this endorsement, along with Nate's performance in the debate, gives him a lot of momentum. Momentum is always good.

Debate Recap

2010-03-18T23:04:00.002-04:00

About half of this debate was nothing but a bore. The candidates were not willing to really engage each other, and the moderators did not press them hard enough to try and draw out differences. Many of their questions involved issues that don't really apply to the AUSG President.

If there was a "winner," it was Nate Bronstein. Not necessarily because he was superior on the issues, but because he was the most skilled debater. He really impressed me though. None of the candidates hurt themselves.

They all performed about as well as expected. They seemed a little nervous on camera, except for Nate. Anthony certainly held his own, and Seth had some interesting points. Nirvana talked too quickly sometimes, but she did seem to have a pretty good grasp of the job of President.

What did the viewers learn? Not a whole lot, I'm afraid. We learned that they all support CERF, and want to get students more involved. No details on how they plan to do any of that.

I was undecided coming in, and that has not changed. I am very curious to hear your thoughts. I know you have to log into your Google account to leave a comment, but that is not that big of a deal. Thanks brosephs.

And that is that

2010-03-18T22:59:00.000-04:00

Well wasn't that fun? I will be posting a recap with my thoughts in just a bit.

They save the best question for last

2010-03-18T22:55:00.003-04:00

This is really important. How can these candidates make students care? Seth says 50% of his cabinet will come from outside the SG. That is an idea that I kind of like, I will have to give it some more thought.

Anthony keeps using this phrase "Student Government we can believe in." Also refers to "one voice." We have found our Barack Obama.

Nate makes a very good point. The issues are what can make students care.

Nirvana predicts an "overwhelming" turnout.

Seth doesn't want to point fingers

2010-03-18T22:53:00.001-04:00

And then he very nearly almost points a finger, but not quite. C'mon guys! Throw some mud!

Oh my god ATV

2010-03-18T22:48:00.000-04:00

Another commercial? This is not the Super Bowl!

CERF

2010-03-18T22:41:00.000-04:00

Drew is very excited that they asked his question. If these candidates want to be endorsed by Eco-Sense, they better have a good answer.

Student Metro Discount

2010-03-18T22:39:00.001-04:00

The first real question. Unfortunately, the candidates don't have an opportunity to disagree. I mean they all support it right?

Seth wants to do a town hall

2010-03-18T22:30:00.001-04:00

Hasn't Andy already done a bunch of those on this subject?

Shuttle stop in front of the Berks??

2010-03-18T22:28:00.000-04:00

I'm all for it. Go Nirvana. (It will never happen.)

Is the President in charge of AUTO?

2010-03-18T22:24:00.001-04:00

No.

Colin Meiselman is pissed

2010-03-18T22:20:00.002-04:00

His latest tweet: "ASK QUESTIONS ABOUT THE ISSUES!!!!!!!!!"

I kind of agree.

Steve Dalton

2010-03-18T22:17:00.001-04:00

He just stormed into the studio and demanded that the candidates take an actual stand. Apparently the letter grade question was his. That was interesting.

Nate brought the jokes

2010-03-18T22:14:00.000-04:00

Humor is always useful in debates.

If Seth wants to be the anti-establishment candidate...

2010-03-18T22:13:00.002-04:00

...he needs to be more critical of MacCracken.

But assign a letter grade? What a dumb question.

She kind of dodged the question

2010-03-18T22:10:00.002-04:00

Says she wants to focus on the issues. Seth is quick to criticize the BOE's decision. He says he is glad it all worked out. Did it? She is off the ballot.

Oh good we get to hear more about Nirvana's DQ

2010-03-18T22:09:00.001-04:00

Because we haven't heard enough about it already.

The best opening statement

2010-03-18T22:08:00.001-04:00

The honor goes to Nate Bronstein. Well rehearsed, but it moved me.

22 Viewers

2010-03-18T22:07:00.003-04:00

That is how many people are currently watching the debate online. No way to tell how many people are watching on television.

Why is Drew Veysey sitting next to me?

2010-03-18T22:02:00.003-04:00

I have no idea, but he is very unhappy about the bottled water that each of the candidates has in front of them.

Ten minutes

2010-03-18T21:50:00.001-04:00

If you live on campus, you can tune into channel 2 or 15. Otherwise, check out http://www.auatv.com.

Live in twenty minutes

2010-03-18T21:40:00.001-04:00

The candidates have taken the seats in the studio. They sharing a long table. From left to right, they are seated in this order: Nirvana, Seth, Anthony, Nate.

Nirvana has arrived

2010-03-18T21:33:00.001-04:00

All the candidates are here.

The candidates arrive

2010-03-18T21:26:00.002-04:00

Anthony, Seth, and Nate have all arrived here at the ATV studio. Seth and Nate are in suits and ties. Anthony has the vest with a red tie. Still waiting on Nirvana's arrival.

Debate Preview

2010-03-18T20:21:00.004-04:00

I am currently sitting in ATV on the second floor of MGC, where the annual Student Government Presidential Debate will be happening in less than two hours. Why am I here two hours early? As you might have guessed, I have no life.

There are plenty of questions that I hope to have answered by the end of the night. Here are some of them:

What will the candidates wear? You can tell a lot by a candidate's clothes. Last year, Zach Solomon wore a dress shirt and tie, Andy wore a suit and tie, and I wore a suit without a tie. What does it all mean? A suit and tie indicates that you are all business. The no-tie look indicates that you are a man of the people. I imagine that we will see Nate in a suit. I am just about positive that Anthony will wear a three piece suit. Will Seth opt for the no-tie look? Only time will tell. I don't really know anything about women's clothing, so I will refrain from commenting on Nirvana's outfit.

Will they attack each other? These candidates all know each other well, and are pretty friendly with each other. How much of a distinction will they attempt to draw between themselves? This is one of the best opportunities that they will have to make themselves stand out in front of a live audience, and they need to take advantage of it.

How many people will watch? My guess is that this debate will probably set a record for the most viewers that ATV has ever had. But I am also guessing that many of the people will be friends of candidates that have already made up their minds. The real question is: how many undecided voters will be watching?

Will one candidate emerge as the frontrunner? Recently, I declared that Nirvana was the favorite to win. But I also said that a lot could happen to change that. A great debate moment for someone (or a bad one) could make that happen. And now that it looks like Nirvana won't be on the ballot, things are even more wide open.

Keep refreshing the page throughout the night as I will have updates on the answers to all of these questions. And other stuff.

This story is getting old fast

2010-03-18T18:05:00.004-04:00

The Eagle is reporting that the BOE has ruled once again that Nirvana Habash's name needs to come off the ballot (her case had been sent back to the BOE by the Judicial Board after her appeal last night). Apparently, they ruled that she can still campaign as a write-in candidate. She still has the ability to appeal this new decision to the Judicial Board. The fun never ends.

Don't forget: the debate is tonight at 10. I'll be blogging.

Rosenstein wins informal blog poll

2010-03-18T10:19:00.000-04:00

Seth Rosenstein narrowly defeated Nate Bronstein among the 192 voters that cast votes on this blog's poll. What does it mean? Who knows.

Don't forget that I will be live blogging during the debate tonight at 10 pm.

Tonight: The Debate

2010-03-18T08:33:00.003-04:00

Hopefully the drama surrounding Nirvana and her campaign will soon be over, and everyone can go back to focusing on the issues.

Tonight, the candidates will participate in a debate that is co-sponsored by ATV and The Eagle. It will take place at 10 pm, and you can watch it on ATV. I will, of course, be live blogging the entire thing. Be sure to open up my blog around 10 and refresh the page throughout the night.

The BOE Should Let Nirvana Run

2010-03-17T23:06:00.002-04:00

The Judicial Board will hear Nirvana Habash's appeal in just a few minutes. Before they do, I want to go on record as being completely in support of her appeal. The BOE is way out of line on this one.

Here are my reasons:

1. She didn't actually do anything. It was two of her friends that sent the email in question. According to Nirvana, she was never asked to report any "campaign staff," so they didn't have any official titles. It could have been anybody that went on Blackboard and sent out an email in support of a candidate. Can every candidate be expected to control everything that is said about them by other people? And, as she wisely points out in her appeal, the rule states that "No candidate may send any campaign message..." Well, in this case, the candidate did not send the message.

2. The punishment does not fit the crime. The BOE's rules also state that they can disqualify candidates in "extreme cases." This should not count as "extreme." It was only one email. Last year, I hung up a banner on the freaking parking garage and one of my friends posted extremely inappropriate comments on Zack's Facebook group. My punishment? Nothing. A few years back, Ashley Mushnick made a video in the residence halls, which was not allowed. Her punishment? She was not allowed to actively campaign for the final two days (she still won). Seth Rosenstein posted a comment on this blog that the BOE determined was "campaigning," before campaigning was allowed. His punishment? He had to ask me to delete it. Nirvana's case is not extreme. Not even close.

The email that was sent out was unfortunate, as it does probably violate the spirit of the rules. However, it should not result in a disqualification. That is outrageous. We, the students, deserve to have the full field of candidates to choose from. The BOE needs to stop acting like they are God, and just let people run for office. I understand that there is a need for rules, and a need for them to be enforced. But too often they take themselves way too seriously and do something like this.

Also, it should be noted that, in the absence of a Chairperson for the BOE, the Chair of the Judicial Board fills in. Therefore, the BOE (which disqualified Nirvana) and the Judicial Board (which will hear her appeal) are currently chaired by the same person. That seems fair.