Another election season for the Student Government Association (SGA) has rolled around, and its fruits leave me anxious for the future of a university campus I will leave in several months.
Senators vying to join the Executive Rules Committee (ERC) as officers of SGA delivered speeches and answered questions last Thursday afternoon.
While I arrived late and missed the first four speeches, which I presume were wonderful in every right, I was able to catch the final five. All the candidates I listened to spoke well, and no doubt are very passionate for the positions and the change they might bring to campus.
But, unfortunately, there were several issues with the process at large that belies greater problems within SGA.
There are three candidates running for ERC positions unopposed who have very little experience on SGA.
Riley Brown is running to be vice president of student groups. Brown has served on the budget and finance committee and has participated in a “special task force” made by SGA President Aven Bittinger. Meanwhile, Lance Hines-Butts is running to be the vice president of external affairs. Finally, Brenda Aristy is running to be vice president of budget and finance unopposed. She has served on the budget and finance committee.
I take no issue with Aristy’s character or how she presented herself during her speech. However, on principle, nobody running to oversee the SGA budget (which was $3,400,000 during the 2018-2019 fiscal year) should do so unchallenged. If Aristy withdrew from the race tomorrow for any hypothetical reason, anyone, regardless of qualification or moral stature, could write in and win the position with enough votes.
While it was excellent to see many current members of SGA present, it was disheartening to see so few of the faces SGA purports to represent. As a senior, I have spent four years among a variety of social circles and student groups listening to others complain about the status quo, be it on campus rules, perspectives on Greek Life or budget allocations. Yet, I only saw a smattering of community members from outside SGA.
These issues lead me to ask: Is the campus devoid of student leaders willing to make change happen? Or is this indicative of something greater?
The fact that so few members of campus turned out for the elections, and so few senators chose not to step up into these positions, outlines two things: The apathy of the student body at this institution and a failure of SGA to instill confidence in the student body it represents to encourage those students to run for positions.
Running to be an officer of the organization with the most agency to invoke change on campus needs to have meaning. It needs to have substance. It needs to be more than giving a five-minute speech about leadership and motivation in front of people who currently are members of SGA.
What can happen to fix this? Someone once said to “never underestimate the power of a write-in.” ERC elections should not be a path of least resistance for individuals to rise to the top of what should be the most influential organization on campus. When people go unchallenged, they grow complacent and end up not serving the best they can. It is when people have to endure strife and be tested by their merits that they not only provide the best end-goal for all, but also grow as people and leaders.
I know with absolute certainty from my own personal interactions there are senators deserving and more than capable of taking on these leadership positions. Why they do not run is beyond me, but I call upon these senators now to rise to the call and run via write-in. SGA could have a bright future, but it needs leaders who have experienced the process to emerge from within its ranks to take charge of the organization, instead of abandoning ship when change seems impossible or distant.
A prior version of this column incorrectly stated Riley Brown was appointed to SGA this spring. At the time of this correction, Riley Brown is not an SGA senator.
"Your World Today" is a weekly column written by the editor-in-chief of The Slate. It represents solely the subjective opinion of the individual who wrote it. For Staff Editorial opinions, see this week's "The Slate Speaks."
The Slate welcomes thoughtful discussion on all of our stories, but please keep comments civil and on-topic. Read our full guidelines here.