Tuesday, January 23, 2007
Oh, noes!
The Daily Cal is going to try to express an opinion about the ASUC. The first line online is missing, which is too bad, since it had the winning lottery numbers for next week. It's about the Election Council Chair thingie, where Jessica Wren will probably be confirmed tomorrow.
With so much controversy surrounding the election last April (and elections in most years in recent memory, for that matter), the chair nomination should have been a bigger priority on the ASUC agenda. The obstacles that held up the process were foreseeable. Not only were they forseeable. The ASUC voted for those problems, but the Daily Cal did not oppose that, because they were too lazy to actually find out about it. (Hence the "no endorsement" for the GA referendum last year.)
It's worth noting, though, that this isn't all that different from what happened last year, when the ECC was appointed late, and the election was actually administered with minimal problems last year. The Election Council didn't have anything major to do with the events of the summer. This requires an understanding of detail, though, which is perhaps too much to expect from the Daily Cal.
The issue of graduate student involvement in the selection process, which is cited as the primary reason for the delay, could have been addressed in advance. Requirements passed last year mandating graduate students take part in the Elections Council formation were clearly well intentioned. But officials should have accounted for the rush of work that can overwhelm grad students. Allowing them to voluntarily abdicate their responsibility in cases of too much work would be an easy solution. Hmm... let's rephrase that:
The issue of graduate student involvement in the selection process, which is cited as the primary reason for the delay, could have been addressed in advance but wasn't, since both parties and the entire GA supported it. Requirements passed last year mandating graduate students take part in the Elections Council formation were clearly well intentioned, but apparently those who pushed for it forgot that they'd actually have to execute on the responsibility they demanded. Allowing them to voluntarily abdicate their responsibility in cases of too much work would be an easy solution, as long as it was accompanied by a pay cut to the GA. Moving on...
Now the ASUC is eight weeks behind in the elections process. The lost time could have been used to clarify and simplify rules about something like chalking that produced so much controversy last time around. Well, no, you don't need an Elections Council Chair for that. That's something the Senate has to do itself by changing the bylaws. My understanding is that it's planned for February/March.
. . .
|
. . .
|
