Many ASU students can recall the indescribable circus that was last spring's election for the Undergraduate Student Government presidency. A motley crew of characters engaged in a frenzied fight for the votes of the few ballot-casting students. Emerging above the noise of this election was the Cinderella story of an idealistic Saudi Arabian immigrant and his sharp, levelheaded partner in crime.
Through a scathing, satirical assault on excessive USG campaign spending, they were able to make an unfamiliar institution palatable to everyday Sun Devils, converting their idealism into the Alamoodi-Widmer administration.
Popular mythology about the dynamic Yaser Alamoodi and Corinne "Cori" Widmer duo seems to uphold the narrative. However, it is likely a crop of would-be Alamoodis and Widmers will inevitably attempt this year to repeat their feat. And, without changes in the USG electoral system, they will likely fall flat on their faces.
The Alamoodi and Widmer election, while the result of student frustration with gratuitous spending on the USG election, was also the result of an exceedingly rare combination of passion, wit and a mechanically efficient "get out the vote" plan. While a testament to the power of effective grassroots organizing, such a combination of precision and energy is usually only found in real-world politics.
And because gimmicks Alamoodi and Widmer used are now yesterday's news, even the most disciplined campaign would be unlikely to repeat their feat without significant financial resources or a reform in USG elections.
In Arizona state elections, a unique system, Clean Elections, exists where political campaigns can be publicly financed by a fund collected from surcharges on criminal fines and voluntary contributions.
On campus, a student organization called Students for Clean Elections seeks to protect Clean Elections and promote its mission of equal opportunity for civic engagement. They have approached the USG Senate and proposed a bill to place spending limits on USG elections, analogous to those at UA and many other colleges.
"I think they are necessary to increase involvement in student government beyond simply voting and even in casting a vote," Sara Myklebust, SCE president and political science junior, said. "In order for the average student to feel engaged and represented by USG, the campaign that candidates for offices run should include debates about the issues and should be taken to the students wherever they are. Any student who wants to be a part of the system should have a chance to run."
Attempting to facilitate an equal opportunity to engage in civic life on this campus, SCE is admirably making an attempt to bring the broader mission of the Clean Elections system to campus. And, the proposal SCE has brought forward would facilitate future Alamoodis and Widmers to have a fair shot at winning future elections.
Without a leveling measure, the return to the previous system where spending exorbitant amounts of money on what is a student (emphasis on "student") government election is inevitable.
It is worth recalling that, by SCE estimates, approximately $12,000 was spent on the last USG election. That's $12,000 those individuals and their families could have spent on any number of other more beneficial items to their communities.
The passage of spending limits on USG elections would be beneficial to the civic discourse and democratic dialogue of the ASU community.
However, the likelihood of the passage of reasonable spending limits is in doubt. USG senators, whether because of ideology or self-interest, are likely to reject the bill or water it down until it would no longer be effective.
Either result would be unfortunate. And it would do nothing but cement the unfamiliarity of USG as an institution in the eyes of the everyday student.
Joaquin Rios is a political science sophomore. He can be reached at joaquin.rios@asu.edu.
