In the April 2 Ionian, we ran the following editorial...Alexander Wickers won the race for the presidency of the Iona College Student Government Association handily. Facing three other extremely worthy candidates, each of whom ran impressive campaigns, Wickers still managed to haul in 237 votes – a full 60 votes more than the closest runner-up, Jesse Ladoue.
But, according to protocol established in the SGA constitution, that margin wasn’t enough. The constitution clearly states that “If no candidate receives 51 percent of the votes, the top two shall be voted on again by the outgoing SGA legislature.”
This singular clause made the SGA elections of 2009 far more complicated than they ever needed to be – so much so that, when her fellow SGA e-board members presented Executive Vice President Ashley Smith with flowers in front of the legislature for her hard work in organizing the elections upon their completion, one had to wonder if a more meaningful gift would have been a simple motion to amend that clumsy, ill-conceived line instead.
First and foremost, it is unnecessary to mandate that an SGA official be elected by a true majority. In years when a position is hotly contested by more than two candidates – like the presidency this year – it would be useful if the constitution acknowledged that a victory as substantial as that of Wickers is, in fact, a clear victory. What, then, a more reasonable requirement for margin of victory might be is certainly up for debate, but insisting on hitting the 51 percent mark at all times seems excessive.
Perhaps more importantly, however, the notion that the vote for an SGA president would eventually fall into the hands of the SGA legislature under any circumstances whatsoever seems strange at best, and utterly ridiculous at worst. What, after all, is the SGA legislature?
The SGA legislature consists mostly of the presidents of all clubs and organizations on campus, as well as a handful of class senators. It’s easy to note that turning to the members of the legislature to vote for a student body president disenfranchises those members of the student body who aren’t involved in on-campus clubs and organizations – but it’s even messier than that. The SGA legislature is not proportionately representative of any segment of the student body, those involved or otherwise. Shifting an election from an open, popular vote over to the legislature disenfranchises everyone, in a sense.
If it is determined that a proper margin of victory has not been attained in an SGA election, a second election must once again include the entire student population – regardless of whether a Nuts & Bolts conference is rapidly approaching or not. Democracy can’t be sacrificed for expediency.
The current SGA constitution was approved by the legislature just last year; the Ionian voted in its favor at the time. The clause in question was clearly overlooked by many. But the magic of our SGA constitution, much like our nation’s, is that it is malleable; we can amend it. And we should.
Assuming no one beats us to it, the Ionian will introduce a motion to amend the constitution’s peculiar stipulations about e-board elections at the April 16 SGA meeting - the first meeting after the college closes for Easter.
...But today's April 16, and, unfortunately, we're not ready to introduce anything. I'd always wanted to solicit lots of different people for thoughts on this issue before putting together an actual amendment, and I haven't yet so... A (figurative) penny for your thoughts?
Then we can put something together to propose on April 23. For realsies this time.
