I am writing in regards to the recent articles dealing with the current SA Senate election. The Student Association, and in particular, the Student Association Senate, have a special place in my heart. I was an SA Senator for two years and regard my accomplishments in office as my greatest contribution to the University at Buffalo.
During my three years of involvement with SA, I saw a disturbing trend emerge. That trend is one of candidates attempting to take legitimate campaign issues - that is to say issues which should be argued before the undergraduate student body at large - and make them judicial issues, which are heard by a select few undergraduate students. In short, candidates no longer desire to vie for votes in an election. They now prefer to win office by disqualifying their opponents on legal technicalities, many of which are grounded on little merit.
March 2002 was the first disgusting display of candidates attempting to use the Student-Wide Judiciary to decide an election. The UB Students Party unsuccessfully attempted to disqualify Yesenia Diaz, a candidate for SUNY SA Delegate, from the election. The UB Students Party felt that this action was warranted because Diaz missed a pre-election meeting where general election rules were discussed. Any candidate who missed the meeting was to be disqualified. I was running against Yesenia Diaz as an independent and felt that court action was unnecessary. She said she missed the meeting due to a car accident. There was no police report provided, and I did not ask for one. To be honest, I didn't think it was a big deal.
Diaz's Results Party successfully filed suit against the UB Students Party on charges of libel. I also felt that this was unnecessary. Instead of going before the student body at large and explaining flaws in the UB Students Party's Platform, the Results Party simply went to court.
As I write this letter, there is pending litigation before SWJ that will determine whether or not SUNY SA Delegates are able to run for SA Senate. I have stated that I oppose SUNY SA Delegates being SA Senators. This is especially the case when these delegates ran on the same party as the current SA Executive Board. I have articulated this view in campaigns and in conversations with SA leaders during my term in office, but voters rejected the ideas. Perhaps, a future candidate will persuade the undergraduate body of the wisdom of this proposal, but it is a proposal that should be enacted by elected leaders, not imposed by judicial fiat. As the SA Constitution now reads, SUNY SA Delegates are not precluded from being SA Senators. The only way to change this is through the amendment process outlined in the constitution. Last year, I was active in amending the Constitution. I can assure the reader that no court orders were required.
The Unity Party has stated that the fact that SUNY SA Delegates receive a stipend fixed by the Executive Board results in a potential conflict of interest. I agree, but this can be fixed by amending the SA Constitution as was done last year when a conflict over executive stipends occurred. The Unity Party claims that if elected Senators, these SUNY SA delegates cannot check the current president because they both ran on the same party line last year. This view may or may not have merit, but it belongs to the voters to decide, not a court.
As a former member of the SA Assembly Elections Committee, I am aware of the importance of election rules being followed. However, I am also aware that the purpose of such rules is to foster debate among candidates, and not to provide legal loopholes that allow a party to win an election by disqualifying its opponent. In short, I believe that elections should be decided in the ballot box, not the jury box.
I hope that this SA Senate Election, voters talk with the candidates and find out as much information as possible on all the issues before casting their vote. As a former candidate, I know that many voters complain that they don't have the time for this. Indeed, the majority of eligible voters in SA elections simply don't care enough to vote. If the current trend continues, those who find the two minutes it takes to vote a hassle will soon be relieved of the burden - The vote of the Student-Wide Judiciary will be all that matters.
