De-slating the AMS executive election will make running a more equitable process.
ASUS President Amaiya Walters’ motion to amend section 2.2.2 of the AMS Constitution would allow candidates running for executive positions to run individually rather than in teams of three, as has been mandatory up until this year’s complicated election saw Team OAR—three candidates running independently of one another—elected at Special Assembly.
The current AMS executives will present the amended Constitution to Assembly on April 9, at which time Assembly will vote on whether to the amendment.
The contested election at Special Assembly on Feb. 29, once the election was de-slated, is testimony to the capacity of a de-slated election to inspire more students to run in AMS executive elections.
Finding two other students to an AMS executive team is a barrier to those not already involved in student government. Opening the election to single candidates, rather than teams of three, will increase the number of candidates able to run in future elections.
Expanding the social circles from which candidates originate may equally diversify the identities they associate with, offering more diversity from the student body.
Increasing the number of candidates may boost the probability of contested elections, placing greater pressure on candidates to craft thoroughly detailed platforms and be familiarized with AMS procedure. Running uncontested, contrastingly, allows candidates to take their victory for granted and stop trying to ameliorate their candidacy.
Electing the strongest candidate running for each individual position could produce stronger teams than the current system, which may allow some candidates to float to victory on the backs of their more qualified teammates.
De-slating the election may pose an advantage for executives once they’re elected too, lessening the likelihood of having to navigate the awkwardness of working with friends. Having a pre-existing friendship with coworkers makes it more difficult to hold them able and to separate professional conversations from personal communication.
On the other hand, slated elections have the advantage of guaranteeing candidates have the organization and leadership skills necessary to rally a team. Placing a pre-formed team into office together rather than individuals ensures the cohesiveness of their goals, rather than risking time wasted trying to rectify disparate platforms.
Allowing candidates to run in teams rather than individually may minimize the risk of personal incompatibility interfering with job performance, though Team JNN’s disbandment in this year’s election proves slated elections aren’t immune to interpersonal complications either.
Learning to work together amidst personal conflict is a valuable skill for AMS executives, particularly for those aspiring to careers in politics, a path which may entail many encounters with difficult personalities.
ittedly, amending the Constitution before April 9 is a tight turnaround, not leaving KMV or students much time to wrap their heads around this potential change. It’s possible the current impulse to de-slate the AMS executive election is being driven by two consecutive and unusually difficult elections rather than out of necessity.
Waiting a year to observe the performance of our first de-slated team, Team OAR, may provide greater insight into the value of de-slated elections.
De-slating certainly promises greater accessibility in future elections. The question remains of whether now is the time to make this amendment.
—Journal Editorial Board
Tags
All final editorial decisions are made by the Editor(s) in Chief and/or the Managing Editor. Authors should not be ed, targeted, or harassed under any circumstances. If you have any grievances with this article, please direct your comments to [email protected].