Student Government set out to make changes to the Election Code in its meeting Monday night, a task that became the focus of the week’s planning.
The SG Election Code is 26 pages long and details how the three branches of SG should go about planning and executing student body elections.
Lane Pace, pro tempore, opened the meeting by showing Committee members three other Election Codes from other colleges’ SGs. The Codes exemplified what other colleges are doing and how the University’s SG could change their code to better suit the needs of students and increase voter turnout.
Danielle Rushing, chief justice, said the code must be changed regarding the Election Board, the committee responsible for holding student body elections.
Rushing said there is not a good process regarding filed complaints. The Election Board gets anonymous emails that don’t specify any evidence.
Therefore, the complaints go to either the Election Board in the Executive Branch or University Court in the Judicial Branch, another faction where complaints can be filed.
Examples of complaints are academic dishonesty and withdrawal status exemption.
According to the Constitution of SG, the Election Board can only disqualify election candidates and oversee elections, nothing else. It has recently been treated as a trial court, complete with hearings and extraneous evidence, Rushing said.
To alleviate this problem, Robert Cavell, College of Business senator, suggested the Election Board can decide if there is merit to the complaint, then make the appropriate action after that.
Rushing also suggested the Election Board be moved from the Executive Branch to the Judicial Branch because the Judicial Branch has no bias against it.
The meeting came to a close before a decision could be finalized.
Contact Kristen Frank at [email protected]