“”Don’t vote.”
Some years ago, a student in John Muir College posted a flyer with that slogan in his dorm room window. For his transgression, he claimed, he was assaulted by one of that year’s student government candidates, who feared that the flyer would incite even lower voter turnout. Participation in UCSD’s student elections typically ranges from about one-tenth to one-third of the student body, so the candidate’s panic had some legitimacy.
After some bad press all around, a few disqualification hearings, and some indignant cries about the First Amendment, the incident was forgotten by all students who have not spent 30 hours poring over Geisel Library’s Guardian archives.
With help from an electoral gimmick straight out of Russia, this year could have seen the resurrection of that Muiron’s quest to promote apathy.
The A.S. Council addressed a proposal — tabling it indefinitely on Jan. 5, but discussing it nonetheless — to add a “no confidence” option to the spring ballot. Were such a measure approved, a candidate running without opposition wouldn’t be able to take office unless he or she beat the “no confidence” option.
In the past couple of years, dozens of candidates have faced no opponents, thanks to the dominance of large political machines, such as Students First!, which have succeeded in dominating most of the competition. Under the proposed change, even a candidate running against nobody could still lose a race.
Voters in Russia have this same choice. The president must win more votes than “none of the above,” otherwise the government calls for an electoral do-over and runs the election a second time. Nothing quite that drastic here: A committee would fill UCSD’s empty positions through appointments, not an election rerun.
The 2003-04 Vice President Finance Eric Webster wouldn’t have taken office if this “no confidence” option had been in effect. Webster simultaneously lost to Harish Nandagopal by 1,000 votes and suffered defeat at the almighty hands of “abstain” by almost 100 votes. But thanks to the wholesale disqualification of the Students First! party, he took office and is a quite competent vice president.
Conspiracy theorists could see a proposal like this as a scheme to preempt another slatewide disqualification. Anticipating their party’s elimination, the slate leaders could instead instruct their supporters to vote for “no confidence” in the races that would otherwise have been filled by another candidate. In the ensuing postelection power vacuum, the disqualified candidates would apply to fill the vacancies. This way, even if others run for every position, the slate still has a chance to take power.
But that’s just a conspiracy theory. Others could take advantage of it as well; by no means are electoral plots limited to a single party. It’s just that, as with all things political, it’s far easier for a political machine to abuse the system than it is for the average man.
Speaking of average men, much of last quarter’s campus politics was covered by pundits running UCSD-centric Web logs and online forums. Far too much space has already been dedicated to promoting these egotists, so I won’t bother with much here. Suffice it to say that it’s great when students start paying attention to their campus. Good for all those anonymous bloggers getting us riled up, even if they’ll never approach the quality of http://calstuff.blogspot.com, UC Berkeley’s most prominent student-run blog.
It’s just a shame that there isn’t one single, all-inclusive forum where students can mingle online. Viewing the world through political goggles, it’s also a shame there isn’t a single meeting place that campus activists can use to incite debate, discussion — and maybe a riot or two.
Facebook, at http://www.thefacebook.com, comes close. I’m surprised that few people have taken advantage of the site’s $14 offer to advertise to every UCSD Facebook user. Thousands of UCSD students check their Facebook accounts every day. They’re a captive audience for someone selling his computer, recruiting for her sorority, or organizing a mass march to protest UCSD’s declining Singaporean-American enrollment.
If a Web site can start turning a profit based on advertising, so can UCSD. Captive audiences we have; money, we don’t. Imagine the naming rights for a lecture hall, or even a classroom. Selling out? Yeah, but who cares? I’ll happily watch a concert at the Nintendo (formerly RIMAC) Arena, if the concert is free because of the venue’s name.
It’s not so unrealistic. Think of the Jacobs School of Engineering, named after the founders of San Diego-based tech company Qualcomm. They practically own our engineering department for crying out loud. The Preuss School? Named after a rich UC regent. Price Center? Named after some guy named Price who donated a bunch of money. Geisel Library? Named after Theodore Geisel — Dr. Seuss — after his widow donated millions of dollars to the school. Student Center? Named for R. J. Student, famed tanooki researcher and billionaire philanthropist — OK, not really. The other ones are real though.
So many opportunities.
