SUFC will begin new administration with reform
System in dire need of change
By AJ Piwarun and Tyler Draheim
E-mail
Print- Share on Facebook
-
Seed Newsvine
- Text size:
We plan to meet with various students, administrators, and outside professionals to discuss possible changes to the system. We will also begin the process of reviewing election systems from a variety of universities throughout the nation.
On April 17 and 18, the 2008-2009 Student Association elections were held amidst great controversy. Students United For Change (SUFC) was the only party on the ballot, which was the result of numerous election violations by Achieving Student Action through Progress (ASAP). While ASAP waged a negative campaign and lost as a result, it is SUFC’s opinion that the elections process should be reformed.
ASAP was docked numerous points for early campaigning this year. To restrict campaigning until one week before elections is an oversight in the bylaws. We believe that political parties should not have to adhere to these stringent rules and that reform is necessary.
Among the many other campaign violations committed by members of ASAP is the use of third parties to publish slanderous editorials and fliers with outlandish accusations of corruption. Points were assessed to ASAP for “negative” campaigning, despite them denying any affiliation with the offense.
We believe a student election should be a platform for a marketplace of ideas that are positive in nature, but we would like to see a better system in place to determine whether a political party should be assessed points for bad judgment on the part of their surrogates.
In response to allegations of inappropriate decisions handed down by Independent Election Commissioner Dan Bahr, we believe these are unfair and should be directed at the system, not the person in charge. The system of points being unilaterally assessed needs to be reformed, and SUFC will make every effort to accomplish that. It is apparent that the current IEC feels the same way, based on the fact that he created a committee to deliberate and discuss rulings.
With student elections at the core of Wisconsin State Statute 36.09(5), it is quite obvious reform is direly needed. We plan to meet with various students, administrators and outside professionals to discuss possible changes to the system. We will also begin the process of reviewing election systems from a variety of universities throughout the nation.
We will take office come June 1 and begin the review of reform of the system to ensure that these problems are a thing of the past. It is counterproductive to focus on the past, and it’s easy to criticize, since hindsight is twenty-twenty.
Instead of taking steps back, we must move forward. This coming year SUFC will make sure that all students of the University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee are represented and that no voice goes unheard.
Together, we can change the way elections are run, and SUFC pledges to promote any and all resources to make this happen.
> Comments
sufc leadership on Apr 28, 2008 at 07:58 AM:
but don't worry. despite our reforms, we will ensure that one of our friends counts the votes again next year (for the third straight year). while we want to promote the APPEARANCE of legitimate elections, we do not want to risk losing our power.
KB on Apr 28, 2008 at 01:22 PM:
Did I miss the ideas of how to reform the system, because all I saw was 'ASAP are negative cheaters'. Criticism of Bahr is entirely appropriate consider he was a SUFC leader before becoming the 'independent' election commissioner. Are you telling me there wasn't anyone else to do the job?
I'm sure that Piwarun really wants to change the way elections are run? It looked like he was in charge of your main strategy, get the other party kicked off the ballot. You really have to change it now, because after this year, you'll have people coming out of the woodwork with negative things against your opponents next year to get you kicked off the ballot. Hell I'll put up some flyers even though I have no connection to you whatsoever and no one will be able to prove I did anything, but it will get you points anyway bases on the precedence of this year.
I think before you cut anything next year, you should be required to forfeit any salary you get for being in a leadership position in SA. If you really love UWM and student government so much, you can work for free and use that money for something else.
Dude on Apr 29, 2008 at 09:32 PM:
Piruwin, you're full of shite. Draheim, you're not much better. Resign please. If you care about anything aside from your selfish interests, resign. Hey AJ, guess we can't run opposed to you after all eh? So much for all of those 'If you don't like it maybe you should run' eh? Ponce.
Chris Walker on Apr 30, 2008 at 10:20 PM:
I have a real genuine concern here...consider these quotes.
“ASAP was docked numerous points for early campaigning this year. To restrict campaigning until one week before elections is an oversight in the bylaws. We believe that political parties should not have to adhere to these stringent rules and that reform is necessary.”
“Points were assessed to ASAP for ‘negative’ campaigning, despite them denying any affiliation with the offense. We believe a student election should be a platform for a marketplace of ideas that are positive in nature, but we would like to see a better system in place to determine whether a political party should be assessed points for bad judgment on the part of their surrogates.”
If you had such a problem with the system and the bylaws, then why bring up the complaints? It's clear that you played by the rules and made complaints against ASAP for the very problems you address in this piece. It's highly misleading to state that you are against these bylaws when your party used them to throw ASAP off the ballot.
You can't say "We need reform" when you used the backwards bylaws to win the election! If you truly were displeased by these laws, you would have held back on making the complaints. The bylaws never stipulate that you were required to make complaints, only that the IEC was required to rule on them.
Flip Flop AJ on May 01, 2008 at 12:59 AM:
I was for the Bylaws before I was against them.
KB on May 01, 2008 at 08:39 PM:
"The bylaws never stipulate that you were required to make complaints, only that the IEC was required to rule on them."
But that was their election strategy, get the other party kicked off the ballot no matter what. AJ Piwarun is a hypocrite. He says here he doesn't like the rules as they are now, bullshit. He loves them, he used them to get ASAP kicked off the ballot, so for him to say now that they need to be changed is B.S. You're right Chris, if no one liked that bylaws, they could have all just agreed that they wouldn't file complaints unless it was totally over the top. Instead you've got a campaign strategy dedicated not to ideas, but to eliminating the competition. Democracy at its finest. I sure am glad that a party that got 2 percent of the students to vote for them is going to be in charge of all that money.
Chris, do you think it would be a good idea for none of the SA positions to be paid? I think they should all work for free. Regular senators don't get paid so I don't think any of them should. If they want to save the students money they can start with themselves since no one really cares about the SA anyway it seems.
One final question, are there rules regarding how many years you can be a senator? I think there should be limits, it might allow the SA to have more fresh ideas if people couldn't be a senator for 4 or 5 years. Say a 2 year max as a senator and then one more year if you get elected President or VP.
Re: KB on May 02, 2008 at 01:39 AM:
So we should just shut all people who can't afford school out of Student Government by not paying them... obviously that is the solution. Ask your friends in ASAP if they would have worked for free. You are clearly incompetent.
KB on May 02, 2008 at 01:41 PM:
I think they should all work for free, regardless of their party. But I particularly thing SUFC should be all for it since they want save students money and lower segregated fees. Look at the executive and legislative budgets. There's over 100,000 dollars there. SUFC has tried to cut student services, but I've never hear them say anything about forgoing their salaries to lower student fees. They can put their money where their mouth is as far as I'm concerned.
I'm incompetent? To post on a message board? Do you even know what incompetent means? I'm legally qualified to post here and I'm adequate and suitable to do so, so how am I incompetent. If you can't afford school you can't be in student government in the first place, because you won't be a student here in the first place if you can't pay for it. That argument holds no water. If you don't think they should work for free, fine, but anytime they look to cut student services they should cut their own salaries first.
Ed on May 03, 2008 at 09:00 PM:
AJ, Tyler, and the few other conservative leaders are seriously mentally challenged people. Ask AJ to look you in the eyes sometime, or try having a normal conversation with any of these people. They seriously make UWM look like a joke.