We're seeing a longer, more drawn out Student Assembly campaign this year. This is due to new rule changes that have largely scrapped the designated campaign period those of us who have watched these elections before are used to. The idea is to promote a greater emphasis on personal campaigning rather than a mass blitzkrieg of signs, as has been customary in recent memory. I hope it works out that way and for the first time, a real dialogue about who should be Dartmouth's top student leader emerges rather than a popularity contest or a poster war.
Of course, some things don't change. The candidates will most likely be trotting out the same slogans they did last year, and the year before that, and the year before that. The problem is these slogans are code words that actually mean other things. Here are some of the most common examples of what I mean:
"Take the politics out of the Student Assembly!" = "Take the current politics out of Assembly and replace them with ones I favor." If the person saying this hates politics so much, why is he/she bothering with the Student Assembly? Why not join a class council? The Assembly is by definition a political body, the main liaison for student relations with the administration and faculty. Not every student agrees on how the administration should run the College, not even concerning what approach to take when dealing with them. That's politics, like it or not, and it's really the only thing the Assembly is capable of doing better than other, less political organizations could do.
"I am not an insider!" = "I know little or nothing about an organization I plan on leading." This slogan, though proven effective electorally, most recently last year, is claptrap. This is not because this or any past incarnations of the Assembly were perfect or anywhere near it, but because there is no value to the idea of change for its own sake, particularly when high turnover makes it tough to get things done. That doesn't mean the status quo is necessarily good, but people who have been around, and have knowledge of the problems which plague the Assembly are more likely to produce lasting, effective strategies for change and reform than someone who has never been to an Assembly meeting.
I'm still wondering why Student Assembly president is the only job I can think of where experience is the single biggest negative one can have. The student body seems to have become so fond of this shtick that experienced Assembly members take it for granted that they are unelectable and don't even bother to run. This trend is not quite as pronounced this year as last, but it's still obviously there.
"[insert "Grand Promise" here]" = "[nothing]." Watch for outlandish campaign promises. Things like cable TV in dorm rooms, or a new residential complex, or an end to all regulation of the Greek system, for instance. The Assembly has no power to do any of these things, let alone one member of the Assembly. People have actually run on platforms that included these things, and some of them have even won. We should know better.
"Dartalk/ORL/DDS/[insert favorite scapegoat here] sucks!" = "I am posturing because I believe it will get me elected." We have already seen a variant of this slogan used this year. Now picture a newly elected Assembly President walking into a meeting with Safety & Security to discuss Baker Library Hours, and having him/her say something like "You say keeping Baker Library is too expensive, but what do you know? You baffle Hanover criminals by locking only half the doors."
That's not to pick on the actual candidate who put this on one of his posters, since he isn't the first person to do so and won't be the last. Some people interpret such stances as courageous, but attacking a highly unpopular person or entity to score political points doesn't indicate bravery, nor does it constitute effective student governance.
The Assembly is a persuasive body that doesn't have a lot of real power. A lot of would-be Assembly leaders don't remember or even know that, and a lot of uninformed students aren't aware of it. The result is that anti-administration posturing is as popular as it is futile. I'm not necessarily saying that the administration is always or even mostly right, but a constructive approach to dealing with Parkhurst when disagreements surface is a better strategy than looking at things in terms of good and evil, even if doesn't sound nearly as good on a poster.
Candidate slates, for obvious reasons. Voting for a member of one is okay, but allowing one faction to dominate the whole Assembly, particularly if they and the leadership don't get along, could be a problem.
Single-issue candidates. What happens if he or she can't get the Assembly to go along with his or her issue? What if the administration or faculty says no? Or what if he or she succeeds and loses interest? Watch these particularly if the single issue is an outlandish promise.
Buzzwords: These include, but are not limited to, "proactive," "student agenda," "special interest," "average student," "non-political," and, above all "reform." If anyone utters one of these words or phrases, ask him or her what they mean immediately.
Well, that's about all I have space for. See you at the polls April 16, and may this column assist your decision-making.
