Each candidate for ASUCD Office signs a contract stating that "I concur that I am a registered student in good academic standing based on my cumulative GPA and that I am not on on Academic Probation."...Non-registered students and those not in good academic standing are ineligible for the offices of ASUCD Senator, according to the ASUCD Constitution and ASUCD Government Codes.
- Lula Ahmed-Falol LEAD
- Tracey Zeng LEAD
- Chad Roberts LEAD
- Rebecca Lovell GO
- Jesse Rosales GO
- Joe Chatham Ind
|* Lula Ahmed-Falol|
|* Rebecca Lovell|
|* Joe Chatham|
|* Johnathen Duran|
|* Erika Perez|
|* Edward Baraona|
|* Erin Harrington|
|* Andrew Kim|
|* Chad Roberts|
|* Jesse Rosales|
|* Lauren Thomas|
|* John Dreyer|
|* Tracey Zeng|
- October 15 Monday - Petitions first available in SGAO - 10AM-3PM
- October 22 Monday - Last day to pick up petitions
- October 23 Tuesday - Petitions Due before 10AM in SGAO
- Mandatory Candidates' Workshop at 9PM in the Fielder Room
- October 26 Friday - Petitions verified, official candidates announced
- October 29 Monday
- Statements due before 10 AM (digital copy)
- Platform fliers due before 10 AM (print copy)
- November 2 Friday - Platform pickup before 3PM
- November 7 Wednesday
- November 8 Thursday
- Senate Candidates' Forum in the Dorms - Segundo/Regan - 7PM
- November 12 Monday - Veteran's Day
- November 14 Wednesday - General Election - Voting begins at 8AM
- November 15 Thursday - General Election
- November 16 Friday - Voting ends at 8AM
- Second expenditure form due at 10AM
- Election Results announced on MU Patio at noon
- The California Aggie
At the Mandatory Candidates Meeting, the Elections Committee and ASUCD Senator Carrillo made it very clear that campaigning in the dorms is unacceptable behavior. Joseph Bleckman hopes this will prevent any repeats of incidents such as LEAD chalking "vote LEAD" outside of the Segundo DC, as occurred in the last winter election. Also, many people, both ASUCD officials and students, hoped that it would prevent candidates and their supporters from going door-to-door in the dormitories, as has been done by Student Focus in the past (Fall 2004 and Fall 2006), and GO this year....apparently not.
Lula Ahmed-Falol received more #1 votes, 746, than any candidate in the history of Choice Voting until the Winter 2011 ASUCD Election, and was at the time only the second candidate to ever be elected in the first round, the other being Rob Roy and later Yena Bae. Chad Roberts also received a phenomenal amount of #1 votes, 641, which would have also been the most votes ever, except for Lula.
This election most likely set a record for voter turnout in a fall election, with 4500+ votes cast.
GO Allegedly Campaigns in the Dorms, Part I
The California Aggie reported on September 28, 2007 that GO members were asked to leave the student dorms because they were soliciting their slate to freshmen. This was in violation of ASUCD Bylaw 410B, which prohibits such campaigning. One of the GO members involved, Eric Friedman, claimed to just be helping freshmen move in, and had a right to be in the dorms. According to the GO officials, they were not doing any form of solicitation, but rather trying to help out freshmen and their families. According to the Tercero Area Service Desk employees who were observing them, they were soliciting. According to some LEAD friends and affiliates, a reliable source inside GO said the GO senators had planned on campaigning while using ASUCD promotion and "helping out" as a cover. An editoral in the Aggie appeared a few days after the incident.
GO Allegedly Campaigns in the Dorms, Part II
On November 2, 2007 Jack Zwald, a Freshman student and an intern of LEAD senator Andrew Peake, was approached by a representative of the John Dreyer campaign and was asked to sign up for a list serve in the dormitories. Jack informed the campaign representative, as he had heard of earlier violations, that this was against ASUCD Elections Bylaws and told the representative to leave. Jack was asked if he “was serious bro," and shortly after being told that Jack was, the campaign representative became slightly irritated and left. Three years ago a similar incident occurred with the entire Student Focus slate campaigning in the dorms.
GO Allegedly Campaigns in the Dorms, Part III
Wednesday, November 4, 2007 GO volunteers have allegedly been seen by RA's and freshmen going door to door in the dorms with their laptops getting freshmen to vote. The volunteer even bragged that she had gotten 75 freshmen to vote.
LEAD Allegedly Campaigns in the Dorms, Part I
Eric Friedman alleged that there are reports of LEAD candidate Lula Ahmed-Falol campaigning in the dorms. No specific dates were stated nor are there any confirmations of any complaints filed with any particular authority regarding this allegation.
LEAD Allegedly Campaigns in the Dorms, Part II
Eric Friedman alleged that there are reports of Delta Delta Delta members campaigning in the dorms in support of LEAD candidate Lauren Thomas, a fellow sorority sister. Eric Friedman received these reports from freshmen in his fraternity, Alpha Epsilon Pi. The reports claims that freshmen supporters of Lauren Thomas went door to door in the dorms the week of the election.
LEAD Candidate Spotted Not Very Close To Polling Station
LEAD candidate Tracey Zeng and her supporters were sighted campaigning close to 100 feet of the Silo polling station by a GO supporter, and the incident was reported to the Elections Committee. The Chair of the elections committee, Jeremy Ross, was there during this incident and informed the GO supporter that Tracey was not within 100 feet.
Brent Laabs filed a lawsuit against the GO slate alleging the GO slate improperly used university and ASUCD logos on their website. Laabs, a known LEAD sympathizer, withdrew his case because of questions concerning his standing to sue. He was subsequently censured by the ASUCD Court. Steve Ostrowski filed another case much along the same lines. It has yet to be seen whether this case will be accepted, although the ASUCD Court seems eager to consider the question.
Hate Speech in the Dorms
There are further controversies surrounding this particular election being discussed here. The actual allegations themselves were mostly created by persons who are opponents of GO, but there has been some corroboration with more neutral people which suggests that there could be some amount of truth to various claims. It is commonly believed that most of the allegations discussed were already referred to the appropriate authorities, who will in turn make their own decisions as to the validity of each claim. The current Elections Committee chair has already stated that at least one allegation is false, but that decisions regarding the others are still in progress.
- CoHo Forum article from the California Aggie.
- Election Results Article from the California Aggie.
- The California Aggie editorial about the aftermath of the election
Execution of Past Platforms
2007-08-18 10:33:33 As a former employee of ASUCD I have realized several things about our student representatives. I have utmost respect for everyone who is involved with this organization, but unfortunately, I feel like their good intentions amount to a failed execution. No one is interested in making the school better but rather pushing their own agenda (which highlights all the ways they plan on making the campus better). After speaking to several of my colleagues who are not affiliated with ASUCD, I have realized that ASUCD is excruciatingly detached from the student body. There is a science and engineering population which has been ignored since I've been here as a student. ASUCD attempted to erect a committee which would outreach to students, but it's in shambles. And when I approached senators about applying as the chair for the committee, no one owned up to the responsibility. —EmilyTung
Asian American Representation
2007-08-18 10:44:12 As an Asian American student, I am a bit confused as to why the approximately 35% Asian population is so poorly represented by student government. Yes, there are a few members of ASUCD who are of Chinese and Phillipino descent (and I apologize if I'm forgetting anyone else), but where is everyone else? Furthermore, I am shocked to see that there is virtually no representation for the exchange students and other visiting students. If one of your goal is to represent the under represented then there should be steps taken to resolve these issues and so far, nothing has been done. —EmilyTung
- I have also come across this interesting observation. Even though I have used multiple screen names and fake names when I try to outreach to the Asian population or engineers individually I tend to get a very unsuccessful trend as opposed to other groups. I am convinced it's a cultural interest thing and not a systematic or intentional discrimination of Asians and engineers from ASUCD. There is also the Silent Majority factor where those who are the most active are those who believe that they are in the political minority and thus feel the need to be overly involved. But if we were to match the Senators based on race percentages it would be 6 Asians, 5 Caucasions, and 1 Hispanic. But that would be ignoring a whole lot of cultural information on why certain groups of people are more active than others. —SteveOstrowski
Acclaim for Past Senators
2007-08-19 09:56:42 The major hallmarks of ASUCD which stand out in my head was the fixed route service for Tipsy Taxi, the three hole punchers and staplers at the computer stations, and the two sneak previews at Mondavi center (which although I was a part of, I did not in charge). They had an effect on a large portion of the student population, students appreciated the effort, and in the end it was a change that I think all students appreciated. —EmilyTung
Emily: Your "Acclaim For Past Senators" section does not accurately reflect the accomplishments of any Senators, with the exception of one: Rob Roy, a Senator from the 04-05 session. You obviously have not been following the accomplishments of recent Senators. Oh, and Andrew Kim (an Asian) is running this quarter.
First off, the Tipsi Taxi fixed route was conceived and implemented by former ASUCD President Darnell Holloway. This plan ultimately failed. Current ASUCD President Kareem Salem chose not to follow through with it, the City of Davis Police Department chose not to endorse it, and many Unitrans drivers did not support it either. Would you define this as "acclaim?"
And of course I don't have to tell you that the sneak previews at the Mondavi Center (which were totally awesome by the way!) were a result of the efforts of the Entertainment Council, not any Senators.
In the name of releasing accurate information to the public, I will tell you what GO and LEAD Senators accomplished in the past year, which actually contradict a lot of your assertions. How much is LEAD paying you?
- Increased the Number of Outlets in the 24 Hour Reading Room (with the help of ASUCD President Kareem Salem).
- Got Student Housing to install security cameras in the Tercero Dining Commons to curtail backpack theft.
- OUTREACHED TO THE SCIENCE AND ENGINEERING COMMUNITY by holding the first ever Science and Engineering Symposium.
- Got the Memorial Union To Remain Open 24 hours during Spring quarter finals week
- Supported the Sudexho worker movement to become university employees
- Passed a resolution to increase the number of gender neutral bathrooms on campus (this has not happened and I'm not aware of any follow up)
- Required all ASUCD elected officials to be safe zoned trained.
- I can't think of anything else
Students: Look at the accomplishments of both slates. These are the facts. You decide who you would like to represent you.
Apparently Senator Friedman wasn't paying attention much this year at all....
To clarify.. - Your first achievement was in conjunction with LEAD - Your third was a result of a committee set up by LEAD
For those who really want the truth about LEAD accomplishments IN THE LAST YEAR (the Senator also neglects this list TIMES SIX).. *LEED PLATINUM for the Student Resource Center, which will be only the SECOND Platinum building on a UC campus *LOBBY CORP was bolstered by LEAD efforts, allowing to represent students on important issues outside of UC Davis like textbook affordability and affordable education (Lobby Corp funding also brought to you by LEAD) *Funded/planned voter registration concert which not only helped mobilize the students by registering them, but also recieved quite a few media hits *ESTABLISHED the Outreach Assembly, which is working quite well under the leadership of Rebecca Schwartz *ESTABLISHED the Textbooks Affordability Committee - Textbook rental program at the bookstore, now coming at ya *FUNDED the REACH retreat, a cross-cultral EMPOWERING weekend experience *ESTABLISHED the Science and Engineering Committee to INSTITUTIONALIZE outreach to the science and engineering community *Increased funding to .. Project Compost, KDVS, Club Finance Council, Cal Aggie Camp, and Tipsy Taxi (See SB#22 last year) *FUNDED AND EXECUTED Homeless Recognition Day on Feb. 27th, 2007, which brought attention to the issue of poverty in the area, was requested by the local community, and was recognized by Assemblymember Lois Wolk *Revamped the committee on Student-Police Relations (which was established by LEAD) *FUNDED the "S.H.A.R.E. with New Orleans Food and Wine Festival” which raised over (at least from my memory) $10,000 for victims of Hurricane Katrina *CREATED the Special Committee on Housing in the City of Davis *Institutionalized a more fair process for appointing students Undergraduate Representatives of UC Davis Administrative Advisory Committees to ensure more equal representation *RAISED funding for Aggie Pack Outreach *ESTABLISHED a working relationship (mostly through the amazing efforts of Senator Fluet) with Aggie Pack that resulted in more co-sponserships, and worked to make sure the move to D1 was successful through the new stadium *Successfully lobbied for the 2007 Womyn of Color Conference to be at UC Davis *Organized the FIRST EVER advising days on the Quad (Props to Christine Pham) *Established ASUCD as a partner in Davis Neighbors Night Out (Props Steven D. Lee) *Supported and lobbied for AB832 which would lower student's textbook prices *Successfully lobbied for climate neutrality at UC Davis, supporting UC system wide efforts such as the ACUPCC and UC Sustainability Steering Committee's adoption of the Climate Change Policy *AND MORE... (because that's just what I can think of)
If one wants to talk about representation, one could point out Senator Friedmans illegal campaigning in the dorms (and his attempt to play it off as 'representing' all of ASUCD).
Eric, I don't think you understand my point. My statements were coming from a student's perspective. They don't care to understand the bureaucracy that happens on the 3rd floor of the MU...they just see results. Darnell's plan for a fixed route my have fell through but once upon a time, it did happen and people remember it. I had friends who commented how great it was that the route was fixed. It's a shame it had to fall through after he left. Furthermore, I wasn't the individual who titled that "acclaimed to past senators." Someone had mislabeled my entry. If you had carefully read the first sentence of my paragraph, you'll note that I started off the sentence with, "The major hallmarks of ASUCD..." I could care less about what LEAD did and what GO did because, if you'll read my Daviswiki page, I'm not a fan of bipartisanships and when I find something about any party that I don't like, I make it a point to point it out. And I've spoken to Andrew Kim. As a matter of fact, I grilled him for about 20 minutes about his plans for senate. He, unlike many other GO senators who I've run into, introduced himself, asked if I had any questions, etc.. God, quit being such a little bitch. =]
"Eric, you are not aware of alot of things, one of them is gender neutral bathrooms are now part of directives for campus planning for all new buildings, thanks to the hard work of individuals at the LGBTRC. I am working to make sure they are part of renovations to the CoHo, oh and there are a few more LEAD accomplishments, maybe if you showed up to meetings you would remember" -Andrew
Andrew: I have missed one senate meeting since the beginning of my term. Same as you. Good job on the bathrooms. I'm sure all 23,000 undergraduates will thank you. What are the other LEAD accomplishments?
I missed it to see my sister graduate from high school. You have left meetings and missed them to party with your frat. There is a difference. I don't want to take much credit for the bathrooms, there are so many people that worked incrediblly hard on that. Oh, and I thinkn we have a pretty comprehensive list of LEAD accomplishments on our page. Andrew
I missed one whole meeting because I was the Fall Rush Chair for my fraternity and I had a responsibility. I did not miss meetings to "party." I can name many other senators who have missed more meetings than me.
Advice for New Senatorial Candidates
2007-08-19 10:02:28 Also, I strongly advise anyone choosing to run for senate to meet with all the directors in charge of ASUCD units. I think meeting with directors and speaking to their staff is just as important as speaking at sorority meetings. Last fall and spring very few (and I mean like one or two) senators even came up to me to talk to me. And when they got elected very few of them introduced themselves...ugh. What a turn off. —EmilyTung
- I completely agree. It worked well for me as controller. I wasn't able to meet with every Unit Director before my interviews, but I got about 17 out of 24, and I made sure to meet with the remaining directors right after my confirmation. Those early meetings helped a lot in preparing the budget. I do wish the Senators had more contact with the Units, especially with their "adopted" units, and you're the second unit director in a week who's been concerned about Senators not caring about the units. -P$$$
Cal Aggie Camp Funding
2007-10-06 12:33:53 LEAD will protect subsidization of Cal Aggie Camp whereas GO believes that student money should not go to Cal Aggie Camp and that the money should be raised through concerts. Ultimately one would have to make a leap of faith in trusting that GO will actually come through for those kids, but what would GO do with the extra budget funds? —GregWebb
- Hey, they might do something awesome, we could use something to better our school spirit, maybe a fire truck. We could also raise money for Cal Aggie Camp by holding a paint balling event, I am sure some people might be up for the challenge. ~DavidPoole
- This idea of ASUCD subsidizing Cal Aggie Camp through concerts makes no sense to me. ASUCD already subsidizes all of it's concerts (Entertainment Council, the ASUCD Unit that holds concerts, is receiving a $70,895 subsidy this year, over five times greater than the Cal Aggie Camp subsidy) . If concerts already lose ASUCD money, how can we use them to subsidize anything? -Paul Harms
It is simple economics Paul. You use magic. I can't beleive that people are running a campaign to end funding for a program that helps some of the children in our community that need it the most. Andrew
- You should probably wait until the GO platforms are released. You may be pleasantly suprised. Or you could just keep up speculation. —JoseBleckman
- And will that occur this Tuesday, 10/9? -MM
Our Platform regarding Cal Aggie Camp is: "Raise Money for Cal Aggie Camp, ASUCD's Philanthropy, through Benefit Concerts."
I'm not sure what the confusion with this is? We are pledging to fundraise for Cal Aggie Camp because our fall candidates believe that it is an invaluable resource for underprivileged kids.
The Senate candidates who are taking this on will be organizing concerts. We will charge admission to these concerts. We will make a profit from the tickets. The profit from these ticket sales will go directly to Cal Aggie Camp, our philanthropy. It's quite simple.
All speculation above is completely false. It's only speculation. Hopefully, this post will clear everything up. WE WILL NOT CUT CAL AGGIE CAMP FUNDING. We will INCREASE it's funding by fundraising. These funraisers will involve the student body because everyone loves to go to a concert and everyone loves to contribute to a good cause.
We have relied on fundraising in the past and continue to rely on fundraising for Cal Aggie Camp with unfortunate results. The simple fact is that it is not a reliable funding source, and if possible I believe such fundraising should be removed from our budget. My report on ASUCD's fiscal situation should have made it clear that ASUCD's greatest shortfalls come from overestimating income, and budgeting for fundraising to Cal Aggie Camp would be a step in the wrong direction.
Certainly you understand why so many people are suspicious of GO's intentions regarding Cal Aggie Camp after the 2007 Budget Hearings (not to mention Student Focus' actions in the 2006 Budget Hearings, 2005 Budget Hearings, and 2004 Budget Hearings).
I also hope you'll apologize to Emily Tung. She did an excellent job as Entertainment Council Director and continues to do excellent work advising the EC and outreaching to the Science and Engineering Community. Most of all, though, she works with honesty and integrity and I hate to see you label her as a corrupt politician. -Paul Harms
2007-10-13 10:55:00 Paul: I believe Emily was an excellent EC Director. In my comments, I never once scrutinized her accomplishments as EC Director. I was just pointing out inaccuracies and shortfalls in her statement.
With regard to Cal Aggie Camp, it is no secret that previous Student Focus Senators didn't think very highly of Cal Aggie Camp. And, it is no secret what I personally think of Cal Aggie Camp. But, I am not running. And, neither are any previous Student Focus senators. It is naive to think that the actions of previous senators will influence the actions of current candidates. My job is to advise our candidates. Our candidates came up with their platforms on their own. GO does not spoon feed platforms. We choose qualified individuals to run who have the capacity to come up with ideas on their own and the drive to implement them.
Paul, you make a good point. Budgeting for fundraisers has been unreliable. I believe this is a result of poor management, not gross overestimation. If we budget for fundraisers, then we should also budget for staff to implement these fundraisers. And ASUCD management should make sure these projects are implemented. I am not assigning blame here, but pointing out shortfalls in our structure. This organizational structure does not promote accountability at all. I have a plan in the works to change this though.
Anyway, fundraising for Cal Aggie Camp is absolutely possible.
I apologize for the late response, but I was offline for the weekend.
You mention poor management and accountability as problems in ASUCD. This is not something that you can just suddenly fix by unveiling some new organizational plan (I heard the rumor that you plan to make Senators direct managers of different commissions or units and I hope this isn't what you're really trying to do). Better management and more accountability for ASUCD need to happen every day in every aspect of our Association, including our budgeting process. I believe it would be a poor show of financial management and quite irresponsible for the Senate or Executive to budget such fundraiser income next year, or even the year after that, especially when such income is unproven and since we'll be losing a significant portion of income from other sources in Fiscal Year 2008-2009.
That aside, I can't see fundraising income even coming close to the $12,000 we subsidize the camp, especially if you consider the costs of fundraisers (venue, staff, artist, publicity, sound engineering, ticket office fees, etc.)
If you plan to change the organizational structure of ASUCD to promote accountability, I encourage you to first "be the change you wish to see in the world." I guarantee that the standards of integrity and accountability you hold yourself to will influence how much others in ASUCD and in the student body trust your plans for change and your intentions. The same goes for all Senate Candidates trying to make change this year. -PH
2007-10-26 16:37:33 Paul:
Thank you for the touching advice. You have now motivated me to volunteer for Greenpeace.
To clear everything up, your assumption is not my plan. You don't even know my plan. I do not wish to make Senators direct managers over units and commissions. I don't know where you heard this, but it is incorrect.
I do not believe that you should be involved in my plan. While I value your input, my plan involves bringing different perspectives into ASUCD.
Take care. —EricFriedman
- I think that one of the most important perspectives to any plan in the historical perspective. Therefore, as ASUCD Historian, I believe that I should have lots of input and learn all about your plans. I'm here to help! —BrentLaabs
2007-10-26 16:52:43 Did Ostrowski break into Eric's account? "You will not be involved in my plan" that's an Ostrowskian phrase if I ever heard one. —JamesSchwab
Best of luck with Greenpeace.
Also, best of luck with your legislation. I'm glad we both agree that I shouldn't be involved in your plans. I prefer to spend my time systematically strengthening ASUCD rather than throwing the dice on an untried structure just to see what happens. And again, I hope you realize that the best way to affect POSITIVE change is to first embody that change through your personal attitudes and personal actions.
Perhaps I can't predict what change you'll be proposing on paper because I haven't seen any change in personal attitudes or personal actions yet. Consequently, I just have to base my assumptions on what I hear you talk about on the thrid floor and what Commission members tell me. I do look forward to seeing what your plans actually are, though, as do President Salem and Vice President Hooper.
2007-10-27 05:31:15 "I haven't seen any change in personal attitudes or personal actions yet"
I'm not sure I know what you mean by this. I'm not sure what attitudes and actions you would like me to change, or you see that is wrong. I like the way I am. I am the most principled and arguably one of the most effective and hard working Senators at the table. Please refer to my personal website (which I actually haven't updated yet this year) for details of the projects that I have accomplished as an ASUCD Senator http://asucd.ucdavis.edu/government/senators/eric-friedman
Schwab: I'm honored that you would attribute me with Steven Ostrowski. BTW, how's the job at the capitol? They must not be keeping you busy enough. If you're so interested in ASUCD politics, then why don't you go back to school to get a second undergraduate degree?
- Some people like novellas or soap operas, I like following ASUCDrama. No one gets killed and theres hardly ever an illegitimate child, but there is the occasional suspension and harassing emails to potential pledges. -JamesSchwab
I won't say that you've done anything wrong per se, though I will point out that the only internal change you've actually made to ASUCD so far was instituting public office hours (which I obviously supported, since I coauthored the bill). I will give you some general examples of what I mean by "Being the Change you Wish to See." Please remember that I'm speaking generally, not refering to you specifically.
Senators trying to make ASUCD Units more connected to Student Government should act in ways that make Unit Directors feel comfortable and appreciated. Senators trying to connect ASUCD to the Student Body should hold their public office hours regularly. Senators trying to increase the influence of ASUCD on this campus and in this community should not offer to pick up the tab for the Administration on expensive projects.
In my opinion, these changes in attitudes need to come before bills are written changing our relationship with the Units, the Public, or the Administration. I'm only 20, though, and I could be wrong.
Despite all this, I wish to congratulate you on your accomplishments as a Senator!
2007-10-27 12:52:06 Ok, I get what your saying Paul. You're talking about making unit directors feel comfortable. During Senate meetings perhaps? During confirmations? Is that your idea of making them feel comfortable? I understand.
We obviously both have very different attitudes about the way ASUCD should be managed. —EricFriedman
2007-10-29 21:00:08 A lot of what has happened this election, disqualified candidates, court cases, could have been avoided if people read the bylaws. So if you're a candidate that hasn't read the bylaws, you should do it sometime if possible, it's awesome material. But don't print it out.
Other than that, be accepting of people and talk with all people. Don't discriminate against people because they wear a yellow shirt, or any other reason. Overall, I've met all the candidates in this election and each one of them has something to bring to the Senate table. But some are nicer and more accepting people so that definitely goes a long way in my mind. —GregWebb
2007-10-29 23:04:23 Green shirts you mean? —DanXie
- I dream of a world where all shirt colors can live in peace and harmony, be they red, yellow, or green. Or blue. —JoseBleckman
- What about the purple shirts? Can't be bothered to mention those? Fuckin racist. —BrentLaabs
- No it was a Student Focus shirt and one of the candidates wouldn't talk to me because I was wearing it. I understood where she was coming from but Student Focus is dead and I was just wearing the memorabilia. - GW
2007-11-03 20:20:16 GO criticized me for speaking my thoughts at a recent senate meeting, telling me that I was "sucking up". Not only was that completely offensive but it was totally wrong. For that reason, I avoided the past senate meeting. I honestly don't think we need judgmental people that think like that at the senate table, especially when ASUCD is working so hard to include more people into its business. —GregWebb
2007-11-04 18:38:57 re: GO Campaigning in the Dorms, Part II. Is that controversy heading there without any supporting text because we have not had time to write a description of it already occurring, or is it there because we are preemptively saying that GO is going to do it, but can't write about it yet because it is a future event? If someone can confirm it's the latter, I say we delete it since future events are not facts until they become past events. I personally hope it is the latter too since I was there when the Fall 2004 controversy occured, and the results were not pleasant. —PaulAmnuaypayoat
2007-11-06 11:20:03 It is because of GO campaigning so shadily and their reckless disregard of the individual in their quest for power, that two years of non-partisanship from me has come to an end. I am now proud to announce that I firmly support LEAD (as well as the independents), because they don't lie and cheat their way into office. LEAD also has traditionally had a much stronger platform, and achieves more of that platform. —BrentLaabs
2007-11-06 12:51:14 It is because of GO campaigning so shadily and their reckless disregard of the individual in their quest for power, that one year of partisanship from me has come to a reversal in party. I am now proud to announce that I firmly support LEAD (as well as the independents), because they don't lie and cheat their way into office. LEAD also has traditionally had a much stronger platform, and achieves more of that platform. —GregWebb
2007-11-06 12:51:14 It is because of LEAD campaigning so shadily and their reckless disregard of the individual in their quest for power, that one year of rotating-partisanship from me has come to a state of non-rotation. I am now proud to announce that I firmly support GO (as well as the independents), because they don't lie and cheat their way into office. GO (and the other historical minority parties) also have traditionally had a much stronger platform, and achieves more of that platform. —J. Bleckman
- Do you agree with the following statement: "The diversity on this campus is amazing"? -GregWebb
- In some aspects yes, in others no. I'm proud to say that while I was serving as a student rep. to university admissions I advocated for policies to bring in a more diverse pool of applicants. In high school I worked in the counciling office, which helped to give me the experience to point out where I felt the biggest disconnects were in the process.—J. Bleckman
- I think we might all want to clarify that we are speaking about ethnic and/or racial diversity. I would actually argue that the problem lies not in the college admittance process, but in the K-12 education process. Considering that, increasing ethnic/racial diversity at UCD doesn't seem like a good ASUCD goal unless it can somehow improve the K-12 education in the rest of California. Getting excited over one person's opinion on the matter won't solve much in terms of this election cycle. Also, gaming the college entrance process for UCD (such as the restoration of affirmative action) only serves to mask the problem, in case anyone wanted to go that route. - Paul Amnuaypayoat
- I think it is a good goal but it's definitely not going to deal with underlying problem you have stated. One student at a time, outreach could make a critical difference in a few students' lives. That and lobbying for better financial aid/access to financial aid are tangible goals ASUCD can set to try to improve campus diversity. It's k-12 outreach that is the reason I'm voting for Lula. -GregWebb
- Paul is correct that the majority of the problem lies in the incredible disparity in K-12 education. There are areas in which ASUCD can be effective. Making sure there is funding for EOP and STEP and programs that help traditionally underrepresented communities transition is one. Working to increase K-12 outreach to schools in underprivelaged areas is another. LEAD is historically strong on these issues, and Lula and Erin have been working hard on them. Andrew Peake
- Pathfinder can do good stuff. Under the Holloway administration it hit pitfalls, but it seems to have recovered this year. —J. Bleckman
- Unfortunately the people that run GO were part of the same Student Focus that I remember hearing in response when asked "Hey, how are we gonna pay for this?", "Uh..I dunno...cut Pathfinder I guess." So in short, Joe I agree with you about Pathfinder but your party will not be good for Pathfinder. -GregWebb
- Actually, what I was trying to get at was the quality of education that the underprivileged k-12 students are getting. Outreach is indeed a good first step, but the real solution is to make it so that outreach is no longer needed. What we should do is make it so that underprivileged K-12 students get the same high quality education that privileged K-12 students get, thus making K-12 more equal for all and making outreach obsolete. Such a goal is out of the the scope of ASUCD, and therefore any action implemented within ASUCD (Pathfinder, etc) will have very little affect on the ethnic/racial diversity of UCD. Sure, ASUCD can help one student at a time (or even a few), but we shouldn't kid ourselves if we think that any concerns over diversity can be mitigated within any easily measurable time period. Do your best given your available resources, but try not to disappoint yourselves at the same time. - Paul Amnuaypayoat
2007-11-08 04:00:02 I generally prefer to avoid commenting on pages where ASUCD gossip is traded, but in this case, I'd like to remove certain misnomers in the "Trademark lawsuit" portion of the "issues" herein.
Laabs did not withdraw his case regarding "questions" concerning his standing to sue; it was brought to light that Laabs, who, for whatever reason, was not enrolled as a member of ASUCD because he had not payed his fees for the quarter; as such, he automatically lost all privilege to file a case within ASUCD. Although the plaintiff formally withdrew the case, had it been brought up and he had not withdrawn the case, it would have been outside our purview to hear it at all- functionally, once it was discovered that Laabs, at the time of filing, was not an ASUCD member, the case became moot. It would be unethically, unconstitutional, and against the current Judicial Codes for us to proceed to deliver an opinion.
As to the discussion of a second case, please understand that the Court is not "eager" to hear the case; the Court is not "eager" to do anything except for our jobs. It's tantamount to stating that just because someone has proposed a bill, the Senate is "eager" to vote on the legislation. That's simply their job- to vote yes or no on legislation. In the same way, if someone has filed a complaint with the Court, and the Court has decided that it has merit, IE, that an alleged violation would constitute an infraction of either the ASUCD Constitution or the Bylaws, then we will hear the case. It's our function in ASUCD. We hear cases if they show prima facia merit and they fall within our purview, and someone files them. It would be more correct to state that individuals are eager for us to consider the question. —TimCoady
Standing concerns an individual's right to bring a case based both on access to the court and whether or not the plaintiff can be considered an injured party. The respondents were to argue that Brent had neither access nor taxpayer standing on behalf of ASUCD and that the case should be dismissed on those grounds. Also, the case could have continued if Brent hadn't decided to withdraw it. On the table was a motion for joinder, adding me, someone with unquestionable standing, as a party. It was a motion that the court seemed willing to grant. The case could have gone forward had it not been withdrawn. Thus, the statement is correct.
Not eager to hear the case? Do you not recall what John Wheat said at the hearing? He said something along the lines of "I'm disappointed that this case is being withdrawn because I think it raises interesting questions." Other members of the court echoed the sentiment. I think that it is fair to say that the court thought the case was interested and was disappointed that they didn't get to hear it. You guys were EAGER to hear it. That statement is correct. -wl
2007-11-14 15:54:41 re: GO Allegedly Campaigns in the Dorms, Part III -> Wait, they had laptops with them? I don't remember off the top of my head, but I thought that we (as in myself and a bunch of other people) wrote a big piece of legislation making this seriously illegal back in January of 2005. Can anyone get some confirmations of complaints being filed, before we have to move part 3 to the talk page? —PaulAmnuaypayoat
2007-11-27 16:37:46 What's interesting about this election is that if more sophisticated voting methods are used, like Meek's method or CPO-STV, Lauren Thomas would have been elected instead of Tracey Zeng. The former fixes the problem that certain voters have more voting power than others (when one of their lower choices reaches quota before their higher choices are eliminated), and the latter takes into account the fact that some people (280, by my count) who voted for Zeng listed Thomas as the subsequent choice, but due to the fact that Thomas was eliminated earlier, those preferences were exhausted instead of being transferred. —RaghavKrishnapriyan
- Hi Raghav, it is good to see that people are still continuously criticing the voting system of ASUCD. I remember the previous voting system, and it was horrendous both in mathematical terms (% of people represented) and in who was allowed to take office (slates used to be able to "sweep" the election). Now that we have had Choice Voting data collected for a few years now, it might be a good idea for someone (maybe you if you want) to do some further analysis and see if we can implement a new voting that represents a higher % of the voters, or at least see if what we have is still mathematically the best option. Also, keep in mind that the voting results have been "skewed" due to the fact that only a small portion of the eligible voters actually vote. It use to hover around 10%, but I heard that this last election drew 20% participation (still bad, but a big improvement over the past). The statement you wrote on your user page may very well be correct since most of the non-voting students showed their dissatisfaction/apathy towards LEAD, Student Focus, and everyone else involved in ASUCD by not voting. - Paul Amnuaypayoat
The thing is that the issue of which voting systems are better are tied up in normative questions about what sorts of features in a voting system are more important than others. It's true that bloc voting led to sweeps, but some people think majoritarianism is a good thing. In multi-seat elections like the Senate, Choice Voting actually works pretty well; it's single-winner elections where problems can crop up. (And they haven't in our Presidential elections, as far as I can see.) Note that only one candidate was different with Meek's method or CPO-STV, and she was from the same slate. In the Winter election, the only difference with Meek's method would have been Usenima Inyang being elected instead of Cem Turhal.
I think everyone would agree that Meek's method is better in all the relevant ways to the fractional transfer method we use now. The only cost is computational, but that's not such a problem, since we already calculate the results by computer, and not many people vote. The question is whether two seats on the Senate justify revising the electoral system again. —RaghavKrishnapriyan
2007-12-07 15:35:21 Concerning the sorority sisters campaigning in the dorm: Since AEPi and DDD have events with each other, or for the simple fact that DDD's facebook group features the photos of all the members, is there any way you can provide any names for this account, Eric? —AndrewBianchi
2007-12-07 19:33:35 No. If you are interested, come talk to me. I would also like to know the people that complained about GO campaigning, since the only person that has come forward is a LEAD partisan. Our relationship with Tri Delt has nothing to do with this. The above assertion is simply a fact. Allegations about campaigning in the dorms comes from both sides. —EricFriedman
- Eric, I'm not going to schedule a meeting with you to get the answer of a simple question. Were the Tridelts just going door-to-door in letters? I'm just looking for support for this fact. —Andrew Bianchi
2007-12-08 05:43:54 You know, I hate to say it, but so much of this stuff doesn't really fall under 'issues' so much as 'drama' and other childish nonsense that should be regulated to a talk page, I would like to request Gnomery in this regard to move all talk of this page and the data it represents to a subjugate talk page, leaving issues and other defining points here. Oddly that would include this comment too, so yeah do that please gnomes. —DavidPoole
Is "LEAD Candidate Spotted Close To Polling Station" really a controversy if Jeremy was present and said Tracey was not in violation of the rule? I mean this really isn't disputable. The other claims are. This one was resolved and nothing was done wrong. I my mind label controversy should be reserved for issues/events that are disputable or are resolved with one party being found in violation of a rule.(could I get an accurate time stamp for this, i'm a wikinoob) -MB
- I'm a fan of the "who gives a fudge" philosophy and this would be an example of something I'd disregard among other things. We're already getting into what candidates have on their facebook, this is worse than Ostrowskian procedures! - GregWebb