With “”campus climate”” acting as the prime buzz words in this year’s A.S. election campaigns, the new vice president student life will have a lot of work on her hands. The right individual for the office needs confidence, new ideas and an ability to lead, now that the VP positions will have the power to appoint associates under them. Although independent candidate Rabia Paracha undoubtedly has the weightier resume, Student Voice!’s Donna Bean has the focus and originality to capitalize on a pivotal year.
Plans to utilize student organizations as a resource for a wider variety of more enthusiastic committee appointees. Prioritizes student control of fees and student-funded facilities. Wants to foster better relationships between Associated Students and student orgs through much-needed face-to-face contact. Views diversity as a campuswide issue encompassing the experiences of all students, including those outside the purview of the Student Affirmative Action Committee, Greek organizations and athletics.
The main thrust of Bean’s campaign, as with the rest of the SV! slate, is reaching out to student organizations. She correctly identifies student orgs as the most powerful form of existing student life at UCSD, and wants to use the office to reconnect with and support them. The promise of personally attending org meetings is commonly made and uncommonly fulfilled, but this board believes Bean will actually do it, if only because it would help her achieve multiple goals.
In addition to using student orgs as a resource to improve student life, Bean also wants to utilize them as a source of new committee members. One of the office’s most crucial duties is the appointment of students to campuswide committees – a job that has been marked by limited accountability and enthusiasm. In the past, Bean argues, lists of committee members have been rife with the same crowd of councilmembers. The narrow pool of appointees has proved to be overbooked and uninvolved.
Bean wants to draw potential members from relevant orgs to expand the student voices on these committees into the general student population, and knows that personally visiting orgs is a more effective recruiting tactic than posters or e-mails. Bean recognizes that for her plan to be successful, face time with these orgs is a requirement. SV!’s platform of continuing current A.S. President Harry Khanna’s push for student control will be helped or hampered by Bean’s performance in this area; it is easier to convince committees to accept more student members if the existing representatives are committed, knowledgeable and enthusiastic.
In a paradigmatic shift for the A.S. Council, the departure of Vice Chancellor of Student Affairs Joseph W. Watson will give the programming department (under the student life division) more flexibility, but also lays more weight on the new VP’s shoulders. Bean’s lack of experience with administrators could become an issue here, although her tenure as Khanna’s chief of staff has surely exposed her to a capable politician at work.
For decades, Watson’s dogmatic anti-alcohol stance has crippled programming’s ability to utilize alcohol’s tendency to draw students to events, something all candidates in this year’s election seem excited to move beyond. SHOCK! presidential candidate Dan Palay probably has the most attractive programming ideas in the election, especially his pregame barbecues designed to turn athletic competitions into all-day events, so this board found the absence of a SHOCK! candidate for this position surprising; however, Palay’s ideas could easily be embraced by Bean as a complement to her plans to increase the size and frequency of Bear Gardens. Paracha doesn’t fare much better in terms of her programming experience, which extends only to coordinating the A.S. Pancake Breakfast. No matter who wins the election, a strong appointment in programming is vital.
Although Paracha would have an advantage in terms of building the office’s new institutional structure (something she did this year within the vice president academic affairs office as its leader), her vague ideas about her goals and lack of fresh ideas leaves this board unable to support her as a candidate. Initially, Paracha planned to remain in academic affairs, which is where her experience would be most valuable. Although she has less experience in the current council structure, Bean has the confidence, vision and willingness to work hard that the position demands.
