. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Nap Time!!!

Wednesday, April 26, 2006
Another suit against the elections

Bears United candidate for... uh... everything Andy Ratto has filed a charge sheet with the Judicial Council requesting an emergency preliminary injunction to stop voting. As some of you know, the Elections Council is handing out coupons for gelato to voters at the sites. Andy has talked about this before, and I agree with him that bribing students to vote is bad democracy. It also helps the proponent side for all fee referenda, because of the requirement that 20% of the students vote for the vote to be valid. Andy also claims that, because bringing the Naia lounge on campus is such an integral part of Student Actions platform this year, providing the coupons is supporting one candidate or group over another. From the charge sheet:

My second objection is that the gelato coupon is directly tied to a key plank of Student Action’s campaign. I have seen numerous posters around campus advertising what Student Action has “DONE” this year and one of the few things mentioned is the Naia lounge on campus. I will be subpoenaing a copy of this flyer for the hearing. I believe it is one of only three things that are part of the DONE platform they are running on. Student Action is making sure that voters know that we have access to Gelato on campus because of their efforts.

Chair Wren, by giving out gelato coupons is indirectly aiding Student Action. Any student who plans to go vote for a gelato coupon (as the coupons have been advertised to a ton of students through a variety of forms) will realize, either consciously, or subconsciously that they have access to a gelato lounge on campus because of Student Action. There was no gelato lounge on campus prior to Student Action’s effort, so the very existence of this coupon which can be redeemed on campus was only possible because of Student Action’s efforts. This is made especially direct because the coupon says it can only be redeemed at the “Naia Lounge” and not the Shattuck location.

This link is made even more direct and clear because the gelato coupon is a nearly identical bright orange color as the bright orange used by Student Action in their flyers. I have no information as to why Chair Wren decided to give out gelato coupons this year, but I am seeking to subpoena her to testify as to who suggested she do so, in case it was someone from Student Action.

Even if Chair Wren decided to hand out these coupons on her own, the direct link to Student Action’s campaign is clearly biased in their favor and a violation of her duty to remain neutral in the election and guarantee equal protection of all canddiates..

The logical extreme of this would be if a candidate ran on a platform that they helped extend the hours of the Northside Top Dog from 10-12, an extra two hours each night. If an Election Chair gave out a coupon to every voter that could be redeemed for a free Top Dog only from the Northside location and only from 10-12 at night, that would be a clear and obvious violation of the bylaws, because the election chair would be favoring one candidate and not providing equal protection. Although the connection is not as direct, I think the evidence is overwhelming that there are voters making that link (and I will provide witnesses who will testify that they knew that Student Action was claiming they got a gelato lounge on campus and that they would receive a gelato coupon on campus).


Because of the irreversible damage done by tainting every voter that receives a coupon, Andy is requesting that the Judicial Council issue an emergency preliminary injunction stopping the election until the coupons are removed and this can be confrimed as done.

posted by Beetle Aurora Drake 4/26/2006 04:23:00 PM #
Comments (10)
. . .
Comments:
It's so spurious, so why do I love it so much?
 
Funny anonymous, because I was just going to say it was a meaningful suit at last, and not something silly like a font size being smaller.

However, I actually think if they stop the election and re-hold it it will help Student Action. So from that perspective I hope they don't stop the voting.
 
The sad part is, gelato is the only good reason to vote in an asuck election...
:(
 
On its face this is a very weak case. The ASUC can (legally) offer what inducements it pleases to encourage voting, and SA can claim credit for what the please (freedom of speech). That said, the case becomes much stronger if it can be proven that SA officials coordinated the coupon, particularly its color, with their campaign flyers becuase that is a flagrant abuse of power and used to get you outright DQed. Can anyone say Bryant Yang?
 
The thing its, it's probably not necessary. ASUC election committee is already investigating SA for somee gnarly campaign violations, including chalking left over the deadline and printed advertisements about 10 yards from a polling place.

That said, let's get down to the real business of handicapping and putting odds on the results. Obviously Narodick is the best shot for an exec slot upset, but I still would put them at 2-1 against.

Let's generate some arbitraty odds here!
 
When do we find out if he gets the injunction? It sounds like he deserves it.
 
I lost. Post tomorrow. Between my bar mitzvah and my birthday I'm a little preoccupied.
 
That's too bad about the suit, Andy. Looking forward to reading your post describing more.

As for "handicapping" ...
I don't think Ben Narodick can win. The South Asian community seems to be pretty united behind Vishal Gupta, and they would probably usually be a "swing" group. Also, some GA folk (not usually Student Action voters in previous years) are mad at Narodick because he voted against the GA MOU being put on the ballot. So they will be voting for Vishal Gupta as well.

Igor Tregub has the better chance of an upset in my opinion.

But I'm not too informed about how folks get voters to the polls so don't take anything I say very seriously. :) Not that you would anyway.
 
I'll give any odds you want on SA sweeping.

Guys. You cannot win by yourself. It is NOT NUMERICALLY POSSIBLE with vote transfers working like they do. 4 people will always beat 1 person.
 
Oh I don't think anyone seriously thinks SA won't sweep. It's just a matter of which second-place candidate will lose by the least. Alas.
 
Post a Comment


. . .