Another year of controversial undergraduate student leadership has come and gone, and we find ourself once again faced with Undergraduate Student Government elections. With campaign season officially underway, signs emblazoned with candidate names and campaign slogans will be covering every inch of available space of the four campuses that make up greater ASU.
The candidates, who come from several schools and majors, have selected their platforms and will spend the next few weeks attempting to engage a more often than not unresponsive undergraduate student body in hopes of securing coveted USG executive and senatorial seats.
Unfortunately for undergraduates, USG still requires executive candidates to run on a ticket. This process is not only outdated, it fails to afford students the opportunity to truly select what kind of leadership we will be receiving. The purpose of student government is to represent the diverse population found at ASU, but this is not what happens with USG. Instead, it becomes run by a clique of hive-minded individuals failing to initiate and execute bills that will truly benefit students.
Often, minority groups are left unrepresented or are sold short through the process. If the ticketed campaign policy was abolished, chances are this would not be the case. Allowing students to select one candidate for each available executive position secures a diverse and unique student government perspective that will enact change instead of relying on one ticket that will be unable to pass the proposals upon which it built its campaign.
While it is worth noting that senators are meant to bring the representation of smaller, more diverse groups to the USG floor, they are often silenced or removed from their position if they do not follow the hive mind and public relations methods the executive board puts in place.
Interestingly enough, the Graduate and Professional Students Association — the governing body for graduate and professional students — does not have a ticketed election system. While the reasoning for this is not outlined on its website, we have to wonder if this is because GPSA is more adult and far less petty than USG. Is it possible that USG candidates would not be able to overcome their differences and work together to form a cohesive and productive student government? With a history of childish antics and babyish behavior, this is a large possibility.
It's time for USG to be treated like the adults that they represent and held to a standard fit for people who represent our student body as a direct line of communication with the Arizona Board of Regents. Learning to compromise and actively create change rather than focusing on paltry drama and corrupt and misrepresentative political practices is part of being an adult and a budding politician. Allowing students freedom of choice with candidates rather than a one-ticket-fits-all method will bring the diversity USG believes it already possesses.
Want to join the conversation? Send an email to opiniondesk.statepress@gmail.com. Keep letters under 300 words and be sure to include your university affiliation. Anonymity will not be granted.
Like The State Press on Facebook and follow @statepress on Twitter.
