With the elections now decided, it is time for the newly elected officials of our student government to lay the groundwork for building positive relationships with their constituents, including the organizations of the Minority Rights Coalition. Before we move beyond the campaign season though, there are two key observations to be made of the election process: the low quality of the candidates and the questionable nature of campaign tactics.
Over the course of the campaign, eighteen candidates approached the MRC for an endorsement yet many did not even know which groups constituted it. In fact, only three out of the eighteen candidates running for positions on Student Council, the University Judiciary Committee, and the Honor Committee were able to name correctly all six organizations that make up the Coalition — the Asian Student Union, the Black Student Alliance, Feminism is For Everyone, La Alianza Coalition of Hispanic/Latino Leaders, the Middle Eastern Leadership Council, and the Queer Student Union. Just as troubling were the candidates’ inability to name many of the major administrators at the University, with the most commonly missed one being Vice President and Chief Officer for Diversity and Equity, Bill Harvey. This lack of knowledge on the part of the candidates demonstrated an absence of genuine interest or investment in underrepresented communities to the members of the MRC.
In addition to being highly uninformed about the makeup of the MRC and the needs of the groups these represent, the majority of the candidates also had a poor to no track record as advocates and allies. To illustrate, many candidates for the Honor Committee paid lip service to the imperfect nature of the honor system by citing spotlighting, dimming, and the over-representation of Greek students within the system. What many candidates failed to demonstrate however, was a nuanced understanding of diversity and honor. Spotlighting and dimming refers to the disproportionate rate at which certain students — athletes, international students, students of color — are accused of an honor offense. Candidate representatives for the Honor Committee often referred to previous studies which had shown that when cases actually go to trial, the proportion of each demographic found guilty normalizes, proving that each student is treated fairly, regardless of race and other markers. Those studies were based on data compiled in 2003, six years ago, and there appears to be a growing disparity in guilty verdicts since that time. Between the 2003-2004 and 2007-2008 academic years, there were a total of 129 trials with 45.7 percent of those cases resulting in a guilty verdict. The percentage found guilty for trials of Caucasians was 41.3 percent, for African-Americans it was 46.7 percent and for Asians it was 52.9 percent. Fairness remains an issue plaguing the honor system; spotlighting and dimming are not restricted to rates of reporting.
The second major issue during the campaign was the honor referendum, which had the potential to open up much needed discussions about the single sanction. Instead, what the student body experienced was exaggerated and even misleading arguments. At first, those serving in the Honor Committee in both elected and appointed positions, expressed their concerns with the proposed changes to the single sanction and triviality clause on the ballot through opinion columns and personal e-mails. Students explored other structural problems within the Honor Committee that might be exacerbated with the implementation of the proposed referendum. This opportunity for self-assessment was cut short by some in the Honor Committee, who actively campaigned for the Students for Honor “Vote No” Campaign and used their current positions to validate their stance on the issue. Although this is acceptable for the Honor Committee representatives as they were elected on their views and experience with administering the system, for non-elected officials, this presents a gray area. We do not allow federal bureaucrats to campaign for politicians in their capacity as civil servants, why allow the same for those appointed in our student government? Furthermore, pro-single sanction efforts have relied heavily on alumni support in the past, and judging by the pervasiveness of the “Vote No” beverage insulators and t-shirts, this campaign was likely no different. The lack of transparency in campaign finances brings into question the issue of fairness. Campaigns concerning referenda are not required to report expenditures, but we must ensure the integrity of our elections by promoting ethical campaign finance practices. Bringing referendum campaigns under the regulation of the University Board of Elections is one possible solution to the problem.
Change is a slow process but this campaign has demonstrated that meaningful reform is necessary to produce a fairer process. Overall candidate quality was low, but the MRC chose to endorse the candidates that had a minimum base knowledge and a demonstrated ability to reach out once elected. However, in order for a constructive relationship between members of the Minority Rights Coalition and institutional groups such as the University Judiciary Committee to exist, there needs to be equal, sustained interest from every organization — not just during elections and recruitment periods.
Bernice Ramirez and Carlos Oronce are co-chairs of the Minority Rights Coalition. Their column appears bi-weekly on Thursdays.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Carla Williams deserves her seat at the table
By Editorial Board | 2 days agoLooking beyond basketball and football reveals that Virginia Athletics is, in many ways, thriving.
UPADHYAYA: The Great and not-so-Good sides of U.Va.’s 2030 housing plan
By Apal Upadhyaya | 5 days agoInstead of improving the dire state of existing infrastructure, however, the University has shifted attention away from it and chosen to expand.
EDITORIAL: Support low-barrier shelters in Charlottesville
By Editorial Board | 6 days agoInvesting in low-barrier shelters now will pay off in increased stability for the homeless, which will undoubtedly improve the safety of shelters and the community writ large.
