Two weeks ago, the Associated Students of Madison abruptly cancelled its campus-wide election because of problems with the voting system. And, a week later, the second attempt to conduct an election ended in a similar manner.

Soon after the first failed election, discussion emerged regarding the fate of ASM and possible disbandment of the organization. Calls for reform — and even revolution — began to spread throughout campus. This dialogue provided an excellent opportunity for slates in the election to clarify their future plans for ASM, as it was clear the future of the organization was going to be one of — if not the — major issue in the election.

Unfortunately, there were no takers.

Recently, though, the Robin Hood Slate has come out with a condemnation of ASM and expressed its desire to bring change to the organization internally or through disbandment. While this board commends the slate for taking a position on ASM and its future, we only wish the group's position had been revealed much earlier than the weekend before an election. We also hope the slate will clarify its platform to reform ASM and present a few specifics in the waning hours before the election.

In an April 8 press release, Robin Hood promises to "serve on ASM to provide a much-needed voice of fiscal sanity on Council." However, in the following sentence, the slate explains that "our main purpose now in running is to gain the two-thirds majority needed to either drastically reform ASM by way of constitutional amendments, or ultimately, full disbandment of ASM."

With tomorrow's vote looming, we continue to wonder about the slate's true position. Does Robin Hood hope to reform the system from within or does the slate feel ASM is simply beyond repair and must be abandoned entirely through a push for disbandment? If a series of constitutional amendments form the group's true platform, just what changes will be made to ASM's foundational document if enough Robin Hood votes are cast? These and many other questions must be answered before students head to the polls if those paper ballots are to be considered the legitimate voice of an informed electorate.

With that said, the Robin Hood Slate, at least, put forward a platform. Other slates like the Offsides Slate have remained oddly silent — which might be read as an endorsement of the status quo in ASM by candidates content to have their hands in the cookie jar. This board encourages other slates in the election to clarify to the student body their future plans for ASM.

Unfortunately, fewer than 24 hours remain before the start of ASM's third attempt at holding a campus-wide election of candidates in three weeks. And given this deadline, we believe it is practically impossible for individuals in this election to adequately and intelligently communicate their platforms to the electorate before tomorrow. So much has changed since the election was first held, yet students (many of whom remain unclear as to exactly when, where and how the election itself will be administered) will be forced to vote with almost no new information regarding the views of candidates.