Voters casting ballots in Wednesday's presidential election
will be deprived of the opportunity to elect a leader capable of truly reviving campus-wide interest in student government, despite both candidates' calls for greater
outreach. However, though both candidates would prove better at managing the
Senate body than the student body, Melissa Carson's record as vice
president offers promise that the government under her leadership will more
actively pursue University improvements than if directed by Carson's
opponent, Alison Clarke.
Clarke's campaign focus on reconnecting the Senate to its voters and bringing responsive leadership to the campus center congress is refreshing, especially compared with Carson's preference for closed-door meetings with mid-level administrators. Her eagerness to butt heads with Ballou, moreover, gives some credibility to her bold platform, which includes promises for curricular diversification and need-blind admissions. And while championing already popular issues, the former Judiciary vice chair seems open to encouraging student groups to fund-raise to endow chairs in underrepresented academic areas, widening the curriculum without straining the University budget. Yet Clarke's long tenure in student government and effusive praise of former President David Moon belies her claims of "outsider" status, which have helped her in early polls amongst voters disaffected by President Eric Greenberg's administration. Clarke's leadership on a government organ that most students have not heard of makes her outsider approach tantamount to a Red Sox batboy running for manager under the guise of being new to the sport.
In some disadvantageous senses, though, Clark is an outsider. Even if she
succeeded in igniting students' long-dormant interest in the Senate, her unfamiliarity with the daily duties of the Senate president call into question her ability to ensure the effective operation of the body's committees and executive board. And while her calls for revolutionizing Senate outreach are impressive, she has little to show for it and can hardly convince voters that her rhetoric is more credible than failed outreach
promises of candidates past.
Carson won't turn the Senate around, either. But while her acerbic
posture and do-it-yourself leadership style will not dampen the infighting and disloyalty that plague the body, things will get done. Whereas Clarke would meet resistance from career Senators who have spent the last year working with the vice president, Carson has a network of allies on the Senate ready to work under her, if not with her, next year.
More importantly, Carson has proven herself capable of bringing about the type of small changes - such as extending late night parking hours and creating the TCU email list - that must accompany the broader goals she plans to pursue, though will likely struggle to achieve. Carson, for all her temerity, lacks Clarke's desire to fight administrators on behalf of students.
But her personal relationships with Dowling deans and experience on University governing committees could render her cooperative approach equally effective. Both candidates have expressed dissatisfaction with President Eric Greenberg, hoping to distance themselves from the unpopularity of the Senate. This strategy is indicative of a systemic problem in Tufts' student government, which will never affect fundamental change until its leadership undertakes projects that transcend the one-year tenure of a particular president.
Instead of reinventing the wheel, whichever candidate emerges victories on Wednesday should build upon the successes of presidents past, aggressively attacking Tufts' financial aid system, housing inadequacies, and academic offerings with the vigor Carson exhibited throughout this past year.
