As I left class two weeks ago, I couldn’t help but be
drawn to the sounds of a guitar and drum set-I am but a
simple being. When I arrived at the source of the music, I
found more than just a band’s performance; students were
playing instruments to attract people to vote in the Student
Government Association elections.
Truly, what a brilliant idea.
Laptop computers were set up next to the band for
students to cast their votes. When I walked up to a computer,
one student provided me with an explanation about how
to vote. How nice.
“That’s me; I’m running for senator,” he said, pointing
to himself on the screen when the voting page came up.
He then proceeded to watch me cast my votes. This was
not OK. In fact, this was completely disingenuous and
amounted to dirty politics.
I ended up telling him to go away, and ? once he left
? I un-clicked his box.
Friends, running a voting process like this is one of the
biggest hindrances possible to a real democracy.
A candidate sponsoring a musical event is acceptable,
but when he or she hovers above you while you vote, it is
quite another story. Even when you go to cast your vote
for state and national government, there is a perimeter
candidates and their supporters must remain outside.
This was not an SGA presidential candidate, but a
senator. When a candidate pressures voters while they
are voting, it definitely might result in a biased vote. If
this pressuring happened to me, I’m sure it happened to
many others, as well.
When looking at the SGA election
bylaws, there are no rules to
prevent this behavior. A voter is not
guaranteed privacy when voting or
protected from intimidation at the
voting booth.
In Article III, Section D, the
SGA bylaws list the actions that
are prohibited while campaigning.
The bylaws only address the correct
posting of campaign material,
the illegality of campaigning in a
computer lab or James Branch Cabell
Library (Tompkins-McCaw Library
doesn’t count, apparently) and that
“a candidate may not exchange
money or services with voters in an
attempt to obtain votes.”
When I encountered that senatorial
candidate, no laws were
broken.
A system is set up for SGA elections grievances, but
my story apparently doesn’t apply. Besides, even if I had
a case to present, SGA members only hear cases until 24
hours after the polls close. Had I known about this time
limit, I might have tried to complain, but navigating the
SGA Web site and finding the election bylaws alone took
a half hour and a few phone calls.
My aim is not to condemn or to support any particular
candidate; it is a plea for such shady political action to
no longer take place at the voting booth. Candidates are
supposed to wait until they get into office before they start
doing unethical things.