NEWS
ASM nullifies Wisconsin Union, living-wage votes
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Michael Gendall:
- School detox numbers highest in nation (October 20, 2005)
- Michigan fans claim UW students grossly inappropriate at game (October 20, 2005)
- Regent Walsh looks for swift committee findings (October 21, 2005)
- In-Depth: Criminalizing hate (February 2, 2006)
Related Stories:
- Canceled ASM referendums back on ballot this fall (September 4, 2006)
- Feedback after ASM election varies (October 20, 2006)
- ASM expects success in 4th attempt (October 16, 2006)
- UW reacts to nixing of referendums (April 11, 2006)
- SEC continues election (April 3, 2006)
Share This:
by Michael Gendall
Monday, April 10, 2006
It turns out the referendums weren't alright after all.
Less than a week after the Associated Students of Madison announced the Wisconsin Union Facilities Improvement Plan failed and the living-wage referendum passed, its Student Judiciary ruled late Sunday to nullify both results.
According to ASM, students will now vote on the two referendums in the fall semester.
The decision came because the University of Wisconsin's Division of Information Technology — which conducted the now-infamous electronic balloting — failed to account for 436 votes.
"The right thing happened here," ASM Chair Eric Varney said of Sunday's ruling. "What it means for every student on this campus is they're going to be allowed a chance to vote in the fall and their vote is going to count in the referendum."
Justice Tim Leonard, who also chairs ASM's Student Elections Commission, said the Student Judiciary decided it does not matter that the 436 votes unaccounted for would not have been enough to sway either election, as it was the process and not the result that mattered.
The Union renovation plan failed by 695 votes, and the living-wage referendum passed by a margin of 2,108.
"ASM does care about the voice of every single student and that every single vote does matter," Leonard said. "ASM proved that tonight, and I'm very proud of that."
Not all UW students share Leonard's pride in ASM, however. Sunday's decision is the latest in a string of election postponements and cancellations, all of which seem to stem from technical difficulties in the electronic-balloting process.
Newly elected Dane County Board Supervisor Ashok Kumar, who is also a member of the Student Labor Action Coalition, which sponsored the living-wage referendum, said he disagreed with the Student Judiciary's rationale that the 436 votes in question should matter.
"The living wage, I mean, I'm shocked about the fact that they're throwing it out," Kumar said. "They're saying [436] ballots were lost, [but] the difference in one election was twice that, and the difference in the other election was five times that, so it doesn't make any sense."
While Kumar expressed shock with the Student Judiciary's ruling, Wisconsin Union Directorate Vice President Shayna Hetzel said she was pleased with the decision both because of her belief that every vote should be counted and because of her organization's unique perspective.
"We're excited to see what new direction this takes our campaign," Hetzel said. "It is a chance for us to go out and give more information and get more of the campus involved in our project."
Looming in the background, of course, is the newly formed Student Government, which makes no secret of its desire to supplant ASM as the official shared-governance voice of UW students.
Steve Schwerbel, spokesman for the new organization, declined to comment on whether the Student Judiciary made the correct decision Sunday night.
Rather, he said it is the latest black mark on a process that has been "ridden with errors."
"If there are any students who still believed until this point that ASM could be fixed, could be somewhat relevant, I hope they finally see at this point there's no way forward within ASM," Schwerbel said. "It's really a pity that we have such a dysfunctional government."
Despite the postponement of the referendums until next fall, Leonard said the candidate portion of the ASM election will proceed this week as planned. For the time being, ASM has abandoned the beleaguered electronic-voting process in favor of paper ballots.
"The Student Elections Commission and the ASM staff and I have been working tirelessly from sun-up to sun-down to put together a paper balloting system from scratch," Leonard said. "So far, everything's working out great."
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 3:21am):
Would they have come to the same conclusion if only SEVEN votes were mishandled? Because that, too, would not have changed the outcomes. If the new standard is that a single improper vote cancels an election, even if the change in that single vote would not alter the outcome, we are truly living in preposterous, pre-apocalyptic times. This seems to me like the machinations of a group that is dissatisfied with the consistent support students show toward living wages and opposition to WUFIP.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 7:51am):
the election was screwed up and the SEC wouldn't have voted to continue it had they known earlier it was screwed up. This was the right thing to do
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 8:34am):
It seems to me that some people are only concerned with voter disenfranchisement and every vote counting when it suits their purposes. 436 students did not get to cast their ballots as they desired.
But that's OK with Ashok Kumar, because his referendum passed. That attitude strikes me as regressive rather than Progressive.
Rocco Rapaldi (April 10, 2006 @ 8:45am):
Clearly, they are caving to pressure from WUD. Why does someone's vote who is not counted count more than mine? Why do the 436 count for more than the thousands that were cast?
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 8:57am):
I love how Varney says that next fall everyone will be able to vote.... but what about all those voters that are graduating...I guess their votes don't count.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 9:31am):
Isn't this how the saying goes, Ashok?
"What do we want?" "DEMOCRACY" "When do we want it?" "NOW"
Now you're whining because there is a chance for right and true democracy to occure. Man I love SLAC
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 9:43am):
Well, I'm confused - why are people still pitting the two referenda against each other? Don't they deal with completely different issues; I'm pretty sure it's possible to have both pass... Although I'd have to say that I know very little about the Living Wage referendum - I hear many different versions of what it will actually do for workers on campus and I don't know at all how it will be carried out/accomplished. I'm sure SLAC should be confident that they will be able to work on another election if their referendum did so well during this crazy election.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 9:49am):
At the WUD meeting, in probably unplanned solidarity, all said "what if my vote was one of the 438? how do i know my vote was counted?" well, anyone who voted, all 8000, now know for a fact that their votes mean nothing to UW unless they vote the right way. All SJ did was remove the doubt.
And would SJ and SEC have thrown out all those votes and disenfranchised 8000 students had they voted down the living wage and voted up WUFIP? This reeks of the absurd SJ decision last fall.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 10:02am):
None of the 8000 people who voted could be confident that their vote counted. It was 436 votes that were missing, DoIT was unable to determine who they are. So Mr. Rocco Rapaldi, you vote may have been disenfranchised and you wouldn't even know it either way.
As for the senior vote, the outcome of either of the initiatives would not have any affect on their student life.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 10:09am):
I can confidently say that if the results of the referenda would have been the other way around, SJ still would have made the same thing. They're stuck between a rock and a hard place right now and they did the right thing.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 10:14am):
Mr. Feingold got to represent the SEC to contest the complaint...so SLAC can't really cry foul play or lack of a voice.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 10:24am):
SJ did what was hard, but it was what was right. They're going to take a lot of criticism, but they are standing by their consitution, by the rights of due process and democracy.
This may have restored my faith in our current student government. I was ready to throw in the towel, but they've stuck their necks on the line with this decision and I respect that.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 11:14am):
Mr. Rapaldi:
Your question could be turned around. Assuming that your vote was counted, why is it vote any more valuable than one of those (at least) 436?
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 11:15am):
ASM would have blatantly violated its own orders and Constitution had they not made this decision. It was a tough one to make, but the election was clearly deeply flawed. Instead of caving to pressure from SLAC the first time, they should have taken time to fix the election problems and restarted the entire election from scratch. Instead, they rushed to restart the initiatives with a flawed, untested ballot the next day and this is the result they got.
On another note, i'd like to hear SLAC's rationale for screaming for every vote to count one day and failing to defend that principle when every vote was not counted. What a bunch of hypocrites.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 12:11pm):
At least the SEC and student judiciary are consistent with what they say. SLAC and others supporting the living wage referendum were very vocal when the initial election was stopped. They said they wanted every vote counted. Their chant I believe was, "Count every vote, count every vote." After the election results came back and the living wage referendum passed, these same people were more than willing to allow 436 votes to go uncounted. This group changes their minds to promote their own agendas. Unlike this inconsistent group, the SEC and student judiciary stuck by their word to count every vote.
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 1:28pm):
you'll get the opportunity to vote in the fall, so how does your vote not count? if you're a senior, the vote wont affect you anyway
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 1:58pm):
I love how 'Student Government' manages to sneak their name into every news story. They have, what, six supporters? Can I create 'Penis Vagina Government' with 60 supporters and get mentioned in the Badger Herald?
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 3:13pm):
What's WUD got to do with it? Don't confuse the issue!
Anonymous (April 10, 2006 @ 3:50pm):
"So Mr. Rocco Rapaldi, you vote may have been disenfranchised and you wouldn't even know it either way. "
So now there isn't any doubt, now he knows for sure that he was disenfranchised!
