From the Editor: Why don’t we care?
February 20, 2007
Kristin Fryer
While researching last issue’s article on subversion at Trinity Western University, I came across an interesting little organization called MOOSA: the Motivated Organization of Opposition to the Student Association. The chief complaint of this student group, which existed during the academic year 1999-2000, was the unusually large number of students running unopposed for TWU Student Association positions.
However, I’m starting to wonder, seven years later, if this situation is really all that unusual. Last year four out of the five Executive candidates ran unopposed; this year, only two positions – President and Vice President of Student Relations – had more than one candidate.
The Class and Faculty representative positions have an even bleaker history. Last year, most of the eight positions were filled by candidates who ran unopposed; two positions – Human Kinetics and Sophomore representatives – were not filled until next fall, because not a single person wished to run.
This week, we are supposed to be electing our Class and Faculty reps for next year. However, many faculties and classes will not even have the option of choosing or not choosing a candidate. Only three people are running for the eight positions, despite the fact that TWUSA extended the application deadline.
Thanks to clever advertising, voter turnout almost doubled this year compared to last, but still only 811 students voted – a paltry turnout given that over 2 000 students are eligible to vote.
Why does this keep happening?
Based on my conversations with several different students, I’ve come up with a few possible reasons.
First, there is the possibility that students did not know about the elections. But I have to admit I find this to be somewhat of a dubious explanation. Before the elections, TWUSA set up tents outside Douglas where people could find out about the positions, and posters littered every building on campus, asking students to run. During the elections, a giant “Vote for Brian” sign greeted students walking by the cafeteria, and when the time came to vote, an email was sent to all students asking them to vote. Still, it is possible that students didn’t know about the elections (how many students check or read the email in their agape account?), or in the least, didn’t know who was running – in the recent Executive election, more than one candidate did not begin advertising until three or four days into the campaign.
My second theory is that students didn’t vote because they didn’t like who was running, or, in the case of candidates running unopposed, believed the candidate would be elected no matter how they voted, and therefore, did not see the point of voting. Fair enough. In an ordinary election, I would be more willing to accept this reason, but the TWUSA election allows us a choice that virtually no nations do: the ‘No’ vote. And while some may believe that a ‘No’ vote cannot make a difference, this is not true: two years ago, two candidates ran for Professional Studies and Performing Arts representative, and the ‘No’ option won out over both of them.
My final – and most plausible – theory as to why TWUSA elections time and time again draw very little student participation is that students simply do not care. Many students see TWUSA as a party-planning committee and not much else.
While I myself know this not to be true, and could cite examples demonstrating this, the fact remains: student apathy towards TWUSA exists and has for quite some time now. Every year, candidates run for TWUSA on the platform of increasing communication, on the assumption that if students only knew what TWUSA did, then they would care. But I don’t think better communication is the answer. Really, it doesn’t matter how well TWUSA communicates so long as students don’t care what they’re communicating about.
Instead, maybe it’s time to re-evaluate the institution of TWUSA itself. No institution is perfect; as we speak, TWU is undergoing a massive self-critique, involving major restructuring, as it seeks to move forward and improve the quality of the university (“Strategic report sparks debate,” p. 6). Likewise, maybe it’s time for TWUSA to look into adopting a different model of student government, one which fosters more effective student participation.
Now you go...
Got something to say?