|
Editorial  |
|
|
|
Editorial
Vague ASG campaign rules need rewriting
With the presidential tickets finalized for the upcoming Associated Student Government election, the campaign season is about to rear its ugly head again in the miniature world of politics at Mt. Hood Community College.
The contest between “Team P” (as Danielle Pannell and Rae Peres call themselves on their Facebook campaign page) and Bradley Best/John King has started out very mild compared to last year’s slugfest between the Andy Gainer/Joshua Ray ticket and eventual winners Janine Johnston/Andrew Fries.
In the wake of supposed cheating on the part of Johnston/Fries — creating a Facebook group that stated their platform, better known as campaigning — Gainer/Ray sent several complaints toward the ASG Elections Committee and were able to restrict Johnston/Fries from campaigning beyond the Main Mall. It did them little good, but it created a shift in rules for this year’s election: The Elections Committee is no longer able to police what goes on online the Internet or any other form of free media outside the realm of MHCC, according to an ASG Senate member.
This is interesting for two reasons.
First, Jennifer Rogers, head of the Elections Committee, told Pannell she could keep the Facebook group up because technically they couldn’t do anything about it, but said the committee would prefer her not to keep the page up. Pannell said that because the Internet is “everywhere,” it’s not considered cheating or even an unfair advantage. Fair enough. Robert Cox, director of student life, agreed.
This takes us to interesting point number two.
The reason why Johnston/Fries had their campaigning rights revoked last year everywhere on campus except the Main Mall is because the Main Mall is a designated “free speech” area. This means that by law, campaigning can actually occur in this area prior to the actual dates set for campaigning to begin (this year, it’s April 27). Rogers said that “because it (the Main Mall) is still on campus grounds, no campaigning could be done.” Interestingly enough, if the Elections Committee were to reprimand a ticket for doing this, the school might face a major loss of federal and state funding because the free speech area is not subject to policing by any college entity. In essence, Best/King could have responded to the “Team P” Facebook group by setting up some stands in the Main Mall and started their campaign the moment they were officially put on the ASG election ticket and, according to Cox, faced no punishment.
Why is there such confusion between Cox and Rogers on what can and can’t be done? Are Rogers and the Election Committee trying to be tough by maintaining a stance that they can really do nothing about?
This question must be asked: Why even set a day for campaigning to begin? If candidates can start spreading the word outside of the college (and legally on campus as well, in the free speech zone), why not allow campus-wide campaigning to begin as soon as a ticket is officially placed on the ballot? Right now, the elections packet and rules are a mess and vague at best. Next year – or, better yet, immediately – the Elections Committee should disassemble the rule book and reassemble it based on clearly defined guidelines, so that no more complaints are made, no more tickets are treated unfairly, no more vague rules are put into effect, and elections – even junior ones – once again become closer to what the founding fathers would have wanted rather than what they are today — a popularity contest.