Dear Editor,
I read Monday's Daily editorial "Hold ECOM officials accountable" with interest. The problems with student body-wide votes held in the past several months have certainly demonstrated the adverse consequences of bending election rules to suit personal preference.
Yet placing blame solely on the Elections Commission (ECOM) does not address the core problem, which is the attitude held by some that rules are mere guidelines, that the ends justify the means.
The Daily had this attitude last semester. Yes, as Monday's paper correctly notes, the Daily's editorial page criticized ECOM last semester — on April 29 — for not properly publicizing the referenda. But three days prior, the same editorial page called for ECOM to forget the rules and hold the referenda despite the lack of publicity. The Daily cannot have it both ways.
Breaking rules also jeopardizes student interest in the Tufts Community Union (TCU). If students cannot trust that procedures will be followed, students will not invest their time in student government and will focus their efforts elsewhere. That's what I ended up doing.
I fought hard over the past two years to get advance-notice rules for referenda enshrined in ECOM's bylaws, in response to a 2008 referendum that had zero advance notice. I was therefore dismayed this past April to see a blatant disregard for these rules, fostered by some proponents of the referenda and abetted by the Daily's editorial page. The events of April convinced me to get out of student government activism and do something more worthwhile, and I'm much happier for having done so.
No, rules are not always perfect and you may reach a better outcome on occasion by breaking the rules. However, the events of the past few months have shown the dangers of operating outside the set rules and procedures in the TCU Constitution and ECOM bylaws.
Sincerely,
Christopher Snyder
Class of 2011
