I am in no position to endorse a candidate for Student Council.
My knowledge of most of the candidates stems from chalk and fliers, word of mouth, and The Cavalier Daily news page. When voting next week, I need help choosing the most qualified man or woman for the job.
Unfortunately, Council's executive board attempted to take that help away from me. With the recent e-mail from Student Council President Micah Schwartz revealing his concern about non-Contracted Independent Organizations endorsing candidates, the executive board attempted to silence two important organizations, the First Year Council and the Coalition, a strong minority voice at the University. The executive board andCouncil must allow non-CIOs to provide endorsements in the best interest of justice and fairness.
Council established the election rules to try to ensure fairness. The spring election rules clearly grant CIOs the right to endorse candidates; but nowhere in the spring election regulations does the Council explicitly say non-CIOs are prohibited from endorsing candidates. Elections committee chair Julie Teater rejected the executive board's request to silence non-CIOs on these grounds.
Council should not be interested in silencing organizations on-Grounds. Council does not need to tell University students which endorsements hold merit and which endorsements cannot hold water. It is common knowledge that an endorsement from The Cavalier Daily or the University Democrats or Republicans is worth significantly more than an endorsement from the Disciples of Bob Barker.
Council does not need to silence groups; the merit of their endorsements is self-evident.
Nevertheless, the merit of an endorsement also lies in the fairness in the endorsement process. The FYC had an interview process with all the candidates just like the endorsement process used by approved CIOs. The FYC looked at the issues that were important to their interests and selected the best candidate from their perspective.
There is no reason to question the validity of such an endorsement simply because the FYC is not a CIO. Technically, the FYC is a special status organization whose ties lie with the Commonwealth rather than the University. Nevertheless, its voice is valid and its endorsement process just. An endorsement must be judged not simply by who is giving it, but by how the endorsement is researched and decided. The FYC certainly did a fair job in choosing a proper endorsement for elections, and it deserves to have its voice heard.
The silencing of the Coalition is a bit trickier of an issue. First off, the Coalition can still endorse candidates, as long as all the representative groups are present on all campaign material.
To claim the Coalition is not as legitimate as its individual parts is absurd. A coalition of CIOs needs their voice to be heard just as much as individual organizations. To have the support of the minority interest as a whole represents a strong commitment to all members of the University. If the Latino Student Union did not want to endorse Daisy Lundy, it could take the issue up with the Coalition.
There is also another quagmire facing the Coalition's endorsement. Because of the alleged lack of a representative from the Latino Student Union in the interview process, the endorsement loses some of its force. However, it is not Council's role to decide whether the members of the Coalition believe their endorsement to be valid. The validity of the endorsement without the Latino Student Union is an internal problem within the Coalition, not a problem for Council. If the Coalition leaders voted to endorse a candidate without a representative from the Latino Student Union, the vote still represents the voice of the Coalition.
The First Year Council and the Coalition are important voices at the University. To silence the FYC is to silence 25 percent of the undergraduate student body; to silence the Coalition is to silence the strongest minority voice on campus. The FYC is the lone voice for an often-forgotten first year interest, while the Coalition gives a voice for the entire minority community. If minorities want to consolidate their power in Council elections, Council should not attempt to stand in their way.
Council should not interfere with endorsements; it is up to the student body to determine which endorsements they will acknowledge. But to single out two non-CIOs, and even worse, a single candidate, is flat out unfair. Teater made the right decision in not prohibiting non-CIOs from making endorsements, but the Council must go further.
Next year's elections laws should explicitly allow non-CIOs that are still affiliated with the University to endorse candidates. At the very least, Council should give power to the FYC and the Coalition because they are important force in University politics that cannot be ignored.
(Patrick Harvey's is a Cavalier Daily Associate editor. He can be reached at
pharvey@cavalierdaily.com)
Read More
PATEL: Personal development courses support students beyond the gradebook
By Heer Patel | YesterdayThe University must rethink its approach to education beyond traditional major-specific requirements and mandate personal development courses.
EDITORIAL: Commercialization threatens U.Va.’s educational mission
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoAfter all, measuring the University’s worth in terms of accrued capital, operational efficiency and numerical rankings molds this space into just another cookie-cutter institution.
YOUNIS: Why every U.Va. student should say yes to English
By Ayat Younis | January 9, 2025Every student at the University, regardless of their primary field of study, can professionally and academically benefit from engaging with the English department.
