With the Tufts Community Union (TCU) presidential elections taking place this week, controversy has sprung up regarding the four referenda that were slated to appear on the TCU presidential ballot on April 28. Junior Christopher Snyder filed an official complaint against Tufts Elections Commission (ECOM) with the TCU Judiciary this past Thursday, stating that placing the referenda on the presidential ballot violated ECOM bylaws, which state that all referenda must be approved at least seven academic days before the elections are held and that a description of the referenda must be posted on ECOM's website by this time. His complaint also noted that ECOM is required to advertise the full text of the referenda. Unfortunately, ECOM experienced delays and did not follow these bylaws, and thus all four referenda were approved after the deadline. Their descriptions, which were posted after their approval, were also posted after the deadline, and there has yet to be any circulation of the full text of any of the four referenda. As a result of these complaints, ECOM has announced that it will hold a special election for the referenda to be held on May 3.
The Daily can understand Snyder's concerns. The ECOM bylaws were created so that the student body would be allowed sufficient time to learn about, fully consider and debate any proposed referenda before voting on them. This set of proposed changes is especially important, as one of the referenda would potentially give community representatives in the TCU the power to vote on financial matters and is the subject of some particularly controversial debates in the Senate.
Despite the fact that these concerns are valid, the problems with delaying the vote on the referenda far outweigh the potential harms of holding the vote in spite of ECOM's lack of advertising and adherence to the deadline. The TCU presidential election is heavily advertised by the candidates and their supporters during the weeks leading up to election day, meaning that students' awareness of the election and likelihood of voting are much higher. Last year's TCU presidential election saw a 48 percent voter turnout. Voter turnout for TCU special elections has historically been much lower, as exemplified by the special election held in February for the sophomore senate seat vacated by former senator Joel Greenberg in which only 14.6 percent of the sophomore class voted. The decision surrounding the role of community representatives in the Senate is one of great importance, as the proposed referenda could significantly change the way that financial matters are voted on in the Senate. Thus, it is a decision that should be decided on by as many students as possible, and the best way to ensure voter turnout is to include these referenda in the ballot during the presidential election.
Ideally, there should have been more time left before the elections to discuss and evaluate the referenda. But given the current situation, abiding by protocol will merely mean that fewer students will actually end up understanding and voting on the referenda, which is the exact opposite result of what ECOM's bylaws were created to achieve.
