Spring Break
ASCSU appeals should focus on process not pres.
Sean Reed
Issue date: 4/21/08 Section: Opinion
Taylor Smoot, the newly elected Associated Students of CSU president, has had a ride destined for campus record books.
His election, just two short weeks ago, saw the highest turnout in student government history, and he and his running mate Quinn Girrens, a former member of the ASCSU Supreme Court, won in a landslide.
Just a few days prior, though, it looked as though Smoot and Girrens would have to throw in the towel over controversy surrounding a free Modus concert held by the campaign.
As per ASCSU elections rules, candidates are supposed to denote the fair market value of any donation they receive. This amount is then put toward the $2,000 campaign-spending limit for each set of candidates.
When reporting their expenditures, Smoot and Girrens apparently did not give the concert a fair value, and it almost led to their ejection from the ballot.
Fortunately, the committee overseeing the election gave them a second chance, and during a special hearing, they were allowed to amend their expenditures to reflect the value of the concert at a modest $82.50 -- putting them safely under the $2,000 spending cap.
After this, it seemed as if all elections controversy was laid to rest. That was, of course, until last Tuesday.
That day, for the first time in ASCSU history, Edward Modec, a four-year member of the organization, submitted an official petition of the election results.
In his petition, Modec claimed Election Manager Emily Laue and the ASCSU Elections Committee defied the ASCSU Constitution when they lowered the supposed value of Smoot and Girrens' concert on the plaza and that, as a result, the elections results were "null and void."
Following this, the ASCSU Supreme Court was to examine the petition and make a judgment based on its merits. But rather than step up and make a decision, the Supreme Court dismissed the claim on the basis of what can only be described as a very loose, boneheaded interpretation of ASCSU Constitution.
His election, just two short weeks ago, saw the highest turnout in student government history, and he and his running mate Quinn Girrens, a former member of the ASCSU Supreme Court, won in a landslide.
Just a few days prior, though, it looked as though Smoot and Girrens would have to throw in the towel over controversy surrounding a free Modus concert held by the campaign.
As per ASCSU elections rules, candidates are supposed to denote the fair market value of any donation they receive. This amount is then put toward the $2,000 campaign-spending limit for each set of candidates.
When reporting their expenditures, Smoot and Girrens apparently did not give the concert a fair value, and it almost led to their ejection from the ballot.
Fortunately, the committee overseeing the election gave them a second chance, and during a special hearing, they were allowed to amend their expenditures to reflect the value of the concert at a modest $82.50 -- putting them safely under the $2,000 spending cap.
After this, it seemed as if all elections controversy was laid to rest. That was, of course, until last Tuesday.
That day, for the first time in ASCSU history, Edward Modec, a four-year member of the organization, submitted an official petition of the election results.
In his petition, Modec claimed Election Manager Emily Laue and the ASCSU Elections Committee defied the ASCSU Constitution when they lowered the supposed value of Smoot and Girrens' concert on the plaza and that, as a result, the elections results were "null and void."
Following this, the ASCSU Supreme Court was to examine the petition and make a judgment based on its merits. But rather than step up and make a decision, the Supreme Court dismissed the claim on the basis of what can only be described as a very loose, boneheaded interpretation of ASCSU Constitution.
Be the first to comment on this story