Dear Editor,

With respect to the front-page article regarding the election results two weeks ago, I do not believe your readers have received the full picture. For that reason, I have decided to write this letter. As a former candidate and the current vice president of the Student Government Association, I wanted to reach out and share my difference in opinion from those quoted in the article. As far as I am concerned, to blame the candidates for a lower turnout is a cop-out.

The SGA did handle this election differently than previous elections, despite what was stated in the paper two weeks ago. The campaign period was limited/shortened by one full week; this was introduced by the SGA president and treasurer during our winter retreat, and is a move I did not agree with. Furthermore, the SGA did not include students in the moderation of the debate (something that has been done in at least the past two elections), as well as asked candidates to refrain from participating in tabling (in the past, candidates were still expected to participate in the reach out efforts, keeping their personal campaigns separate from their responsibilities as a member of the Senate). While there was tabling in the Student Center, the incentives for voting were not a t-shirt or promotional item as they have been in years prior. Instead, it was a cookie, which in my opinion is nowhere near as incentivizing as our other promotional items.

Furthermore, while I cannot speak for my former opponents, I can guarantee that I had meetings planned every day of the campaign period and even during the voting period. I was visiting clubs and organizations, postering and re-postering (due to my posters being repeatedly torn down) around campus and speaking with various classes. The notion that “it came down to how candidates campaigned,” as President [Kassandra] Fruin stated, is to ignore what really happened. If it were not for the candidates campaigning, I do not believe the voter turnout would have even reached 100 people.

Elections are extremely important, even here at the school-wide level. The people you choose to represent you are granted stewardship of a large portion of the Student Activity Fund. The SGA is meant to represent the entire student body, “to ensure its general welfare, and to promote the enhancement of the University experience for all.” This poor turnout subverts the basic core of the SGA, and stains the constitutional republic we should hold dear. This should not have happened, and it should never happen again. For that very reason, I write this letter, and I hope it will shine a different light on the issue at hand, as well as provide for a better understanding so that this never happens again.

Sincerely,

Danté A. Solano