The University Board of Elections, or UBE, has the logistical responsibility to set the elections calendar each semester and to maintain the online voting system — tasks that are critical to ensuring student elections run smoothly. This year, by releasing multiple inaccurate candidate lists and doing so after the start of campaigning, UBE faltered in adequately facilitating elections.
UBE released multiple candidate lists, one after another, each containing different inaccuracies. This was due to a mistaken publication of the first list, followed by inaccuracies stemming from students’ late petition filings or candidates dropping out, according UBE Chair Sara Kropp. But UBE should not accept late submissions, as they disadvantage candidates who have met the deadline. They also disadvantage endorsing organizations and students who benefit from having this information in advance. This year, the list was not finalized prior to the start of campaigning and endorsements. It was not until Feb. 16 that UBE released its 2016 Voters’ Guide containing the candidate list on its website. Campaigning had begun four days before, and endorsing organizations conducted interviews with candidates that weekend. It is illogical for UBE to release the candidate list after campaigning begins — voters and candidates should know who the candidates are ahead of campaigning.
Candidates who are unaware their races are contested would not know whether to campaign or sign up for endorsement interviews without the voter guide. Moreover, this system unwittingly offers additional advantages to incumbents, since voters who do not yet have access to a candidate list once campaigning has already begun will be even less aware of possible competitors.
It also doesn’t make sense for endorsing organizations to select candidates for endorsement without knowing exactly who is running for each position. Endorsing organizations were faced with the difficulty of interviewing candidates without knowing who was running against them in some cases. Due to UBE’s oversight, they were unaware how many timeslots to offer for interviews and had incomplete information when issuing their endorsements.
In the future, perhaps UBE can consider asking candidates to submit their petitions for candidacy earlier in order to have more time to produce an accurate, finalized list before the official start of campaigning and endorsing. Or, if the election timeline is inflexible, UBE should hold students accountable for the petition filing deadline. To do otherwise is unprofessional.
This year, UBE introduced several initiatives to make the student elections process more transparent and consistent with University rules. Among them are a rule change that would require candidates to submit not just one expenditure report for campaign expenses, but also a second report in the interim of campaigning so students can view campaign expenses both before and after voting. Additionally, UBE aligned its policies with the University Exterior Posting and Chalking Policy by limiting campaign flyer size. Though UBE’s changes have brought improvements to elections on Grounds, the organization made significant mistakes in producing the candidate list — mistakes we hope not to see next year.
Read More
EDITORIAL: Celebrating and reflecting on The Cavalier Daily’s independence
By Editorial Board | 5 days agoOur independence grants us the ability to ask the hard questions and to say what University representatives cannot.
ARRAS: U.Va. must revise the Sexual Assault Prevention Training module
By Aoife Arras | April 17, 2024In addition to its failures in interactivity, the module lacks details specific to the University and discusses key concepts in universal terms.
EDITORIAL: Pedestrian safety is an institutional imperative
By Editorial Board | April 15, 2024Amid a national crisis of pedestrian safety, Charlottesville and the University are also struggling to properly maintain pedestrian safety.
