Dear Editor,
In response to the recent letter written by the dismissed members of the former Elections Board, I do not believe that they have taken a retrospective glance at their position from a more inclusive perspective; nor did this group of individuals state their exact affiliations when appointed to their perspective positions. In hindsight, it would have been much better to call into question the potential for conflicts before hand, prior to the situation that arose. But to flat out question the integrity and morality of the Student Government Association and its members, as they have done, is absolutely inexcusable.
SGA has a duty and responsibility to see to it that the positions it confirms are unbiased, and the people are fully capable of doing their duties without any potential or existing outside interference. I do not doubt the former members' capabilities, experience or qualifications for their positions. However, it was pertinent to question the potential for even a passively biased - and therefore structurally unfair - Elections Board. It is not that I see any of the members as being biased in their decision making, but the potential could easily arise for something to go awry. The former board was purposefully vague when appointed. Although they say that they stated their Greek affiliations, this is not the case.
I, as well as several other senators who were presiding over the appointments, clearly do not remember and are fairly certain that several of the members appointed did not state what their exact affiliations were - in particular, the president of Theta Chi. He stated that he was a president of "a Greek" organization, but did not state what organization.
Regardless of the situation, SGA had a responsibility to correct it. It is hard to consider an Elections Board with a plurality - let alone a majority - of members from or having association with a single organization unbiased and therefore representative of Ball State University. Due to this, appropriate actions had to be taken.
As to saying we acted without any discussion or thought in removing this board: There was an obviously thorough and deliberate discussion about this in the Executive Session - which lasted well over an hour - allowing for any discussion of the topic and what should be done about it. The Elections Board was also a part of this discussion for part of the session. To say that Asher Lisec could have single-handedly swayed the majority of senators on the topic of dismissal is preposterous. And it is even more preposterous to declare that dismissing the former Elections Board was to gain an advantage for a rumored slate.
This board was dismissed on the issues of fairness, potential for conflicts of interest and for a more inclusively representative board of Ball State students.
The credentials and abilities of the members were not put into question; it is only a question of the potential conflict and potential for a biased board. In incidents dealing with the integrity of an election of this proportion, something must be done to remedy even a potential issue, and by putting in a new Elections Board, SGA has done just this. Had this board not been removed, the entire elections could have been called into question. It is far better to start off anew with a newly selected, and much more thoroughly questioned, board than to proceed with the former board that had been called into question not only by SGA but by the student body as well.
It is unjustified and uncalled for to say that the Student Senate acted in any way out of its boundaries and to blatantly lambaste the senators' integrity individually and as a whole.
Read More
Three Air Jam teams take home the win
October 12, 2012Nineteen teams shimmied, shook and flipped for a sold out John R. Emens Auditorium on Thursday night during the 25th annual Air Jam.
Bill Clinton Speaks at North Central High School
October 12, 2012Former President's Speech Could Have Effect on State Senate Race
