MSA Should Follow LSA-SG's Lead

Back in January, this page criticized the Michigan Student Assembly’s “stupendous inability ... to police its election campaigns,” and outlined a series of reform proposals — none of which were adopted. As a result, another tainted election cycle has passed, leaving anger, confusion, and resentment in its wake.

Sources in the Students’ Party (SP) indicate they may file a protest with the Central Student Judiciary over election irregularities and assorted violations. Among other things, they are critical of the inconsistent manner in which election demerits were assigned, and resent the Blue Party’s (BP) strong-arm tactics over Diag space. The SP is also upset that its Architecture candidate, Joel Kirsner, was completely left off the election ballot until 5:00 P.M. last Thursday — the second day of voting. In addition, at least 71 fraudulent votes were cast from a Markley dorm room, potentially swinging the individual candidate election results by a considerable margin.

Of course, this plethora of apparent violations begs the question: why would somebody want to be on MSA so much that they would disregard the election rules? Over the past year, MSA has distinguished itself by its blatant ignorance of student concerns. Instead, it has directed its attention towards partisan political activity, from condemning the sanctions on Iraq to funding leftist joyrides to protest in Lansing. To the Review, it remains a mystery why sensible students wish to get mixed up in this nonsense, other than to build up impressive resume fodder.

MSA’s failure becomes even more glaringly apparent when compared to the efforts of the LSA Student Government (LSA-SG). This little known but quite powerful organization has devoted its efforts towards improving curriculum and student life. Most notably, in recent months LSA-SG helped implement a “minors” program, allowing students to now earn recognition for substantial work in a subject area without having to declare a second concentration. Also, LSA-SG has accomplished its work without the blazing partisanship found in MSA. As SP LSA-SG Executive Slate candidate Jeff Harris recently said, “We stick to our purview. The reps on LSA-SG don’t want to spend our time arguing about issues; we want to get things done.” As LSA-SG proves, it is possible to have a focused, dedicated, and practical student government working on behalf of students, rather than one which acts like a bunch of wannabe politicians.

To restore its credibility, MSA must act expediently to take the following steps. First, a thorough overhaul of the election system must be undertaken. Silly rules, such as requiring all campaign materials to include a “paid for” sign, should be dropped. In exchange, the remaining offenses should be strictly enforced — with no leniency towards those who have already accumulated many demerits. After all, the current reluctance to disqualify candidates only encourages a flouting of the regulations everybody else must follow.

Next, the rules governing party materials should be strengthened. Currently, only one member of a party receives a penalty when the party illegally advertises. Reaping the advantages of party affiliation also entails responsibility for the errant actions of members taken on behalf of the party. Since all members benefit from illegal campaigning, all should similarly be punished for it. This would eliminate the tendency for party advertisements to ignore the election rules with the understanding that no one member will face serious punishment. Furthermore, the hazards of online voting must be carefully studied, to avoid a repeat of what will surely come to be known as “Markleygate.”

Once elected, representatives must stick to student concerns, and not undertake global crusades for abstract social issues. They should go about their manner in a way similar to the commendable LSA-SG, focusing on the small issues that, put together, can dramatically improve student life. If they do so, then this page will express our sincere gratitude, and the student body will benefit. If MSA again ignores our concerns, another cycle of questionable electioneering and incompetent policymaking will follow. MR

This article was published in the 31 March 1999 edition of The Michigan Review (Volume 17, Number 9).
For questions or comments, see the Contact Information page.