NEWS
SLAC pushes for new vote
Looking for a print version?
Simply choose ‘Print’ on your computer and a printer-friendly document will be generated.
Also by Joanna Pliner:
- Labor group to give thanks (November 20, 2006)
- Judiciary revokes SAE's status at university (April 6, 2006)
- ASM weighs in on Halloween (September 4, 2006)
- FH King to receive funding, after all (September 19, 2006)
- UW says website causing 'ruckus' (October 9, 2006)
Related Stories:
- News rules set for referendums (April 19, 2006)
- Appeals process carries on (October 31, 2006)
- ASM reschedules voting for April (March 31, 2006)
- SSFC election results pending (October 27, 2004)
by Joanna Pliner
Wednesday, November 1, 2006
While this semester's University of Wisconsin Associated Students of Madison election originally seemed to end successfully, the Student Labor Action Coalition is now calling the results into question.
The labor group filed a complaint against the ASM Student Election Commission Monday demanding the election results be thrown out and a new vote be conducted.
Though unrelated, the move follows an earlier contention of results by ASM members who allege the Student Union Initiative referendum was conducted unfairly.
SLAC member Mark Supanich said this semester's elections were not accessible enough to students and, therefore, should be recalled.
"What's important here is the facts of the case," Supanich said. "Voters who wanted to vote were unable to, and it's important in any election that it be as fair and transparent and accessible as possible."
Supanich said if ASM held a re-vote, the results would reflect those of last spring's voided elections, in which the Living Wage initiative passed and the Student Union Initiative failed.
However, Supanich said, SLAC's motives are centered around ensuring a fair election process and have nothing to do with SLAC's expressed disapproval of the Student Union Initiative.
Student Judiciary Chief Justice Josh Tyack said it is common for SEC to be involved in several lawsuits after an election, and the pattern does not imply anything about the ASM election process.
In fact, Tyack said, there have been fewer complaints filed this year than were filed last spring.
"It doesn't really say anything specific about the running of the election — just something about the fact that there are issues that people voted on that people care about passionately," Tyack said.
In an e-mail to The Badger Herald, ASM Chair Dylan Rath said a re-vote would be frustrating, but that will not keep SJ from objectively reviewing the case. Rath added that any alleged discrepancies with ASM bylaws must not be overlooked.
"SLAC is very serious about getting fair results," Rath said. "ASM will consider the group's election complaints seriously, as we would for any other group."
Supanich said he was "a big fan" of the computerized voting system that was used in past ASM elections. He acknowledged the problems ASM encountered last semester with electronic voting, but said "those can be resolved."
If SLAC wins their case against SEC, which is being heard Wednesday, Nov. 8, Supanich said it would want a re-vote to be held as soon as an election that would be accessible for any student who wants to vote could be held.
"If it can't be done with electronic voting, we want to see more polling places more equitably distributed among campus and more days and times that polls are open," Supanich said.
Rath said he is well aware of SLAC's discontent with paper ballot ASM elections, and that increasing voter turnout and implementing a new electronic voting system will be priorities in the spring ASM elections.
SEC Chair Leah Moe failed to return phone calls as of press time.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 6:44am):
SLAC: Just go away.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 8:11am):
stop beating this horse to death and go away
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 8:49am):
I doubt that if the Living wage had passed & the Student Union Initiative had not, SLAC would be as interested in a revote or fair a fair election. After all it was members of SLAC that where found defacing Student Union Initiative posters and chalkings last year.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 9:55am):
If SLAC wants computer voting let them set up the software on the condition that if it fails they are forever banned as an RSO.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 10:36am):
STICK IT TO THE SUI!!!!!
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 12:37pm):
SLAC - your referendum passed. We aren't voting for it again if you make us revote. You got what you wanted, so now it's time to do something productive.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 1:43pm):
All the hypocritess saying that SLAC should just shut up and go away, why didn't you do the same the first three times we voted on this, when the Living Wage initiative was approved and the Union initiative was rejected?
The way I see it, SLAC leads you in elections, three to one. If you got three do-overs, why don't they even get one?
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 4:35pm):
9:55 am - Doit and ASM weren't banned for their horrible handling of the elections. Although I think SLAC is normally quite wrong, and the Living Wage referendum is a joke, I do believe that they are right on about this one.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 6:21pm):
"The way I see it, SLAC leads you in elections, three to one. If you got three do-overs, why don't they even get one?"
Living Wage: supported 2 times... spring 2006 does not count because ASM ruled it to be a faulty election
Student Union Initiative: supported 1 time...spring 2006 does not count as it was nullified because votes were lost. A plan in 2005 failed that proposed to renovate memorial union and union south...but it was a completely different project with different objectives.
Anonymous (November 1, 2006 @ 11:02pm):
SLAC is Madison's equivalent of John Kerry. They both support the right things but sometimes you wish they would just stop opening their mouths and just accept the fact that they are failures.
