Letters to the Editor 1/25

To the Editor,

Having experienced campaigning for a SGB Board member spot in 2011 and for president in 2012, I heartedly agree with the sentiment that there are obvious flaws in the SGB electoral process. Instead of pointing fingers and playing the “blame game,” I would like to defend and praise the work of 2012 Elections Chairwoman Annie Brown and her committee for their efforts to amend the SGB elections code throughout 2012 and to supervise the 2012 SGB election.

Let me state this as clearly as I can: Every SGB election always has a slew of “petty” disputes all centered on which elections code rules can be bent or broken.

Before 2012, each election saw hidden pacts and agendas between two or more SGB slates — a violation of the old elections code — where illegal teams of candidates would use similar campaign material, construct identical campaigns and entice friends of friends to vote for their slatemates and their unofficial “sister” slatemates. Annie successfully amended the elections code to eliminate these not-so-secret partnerships between slates and to instead allow individuals or slates to endorse another slate or individual, as well as clearing up other phony language in the elections code.

With any close election, as seen by our last SGB election and with our two U.S. presidential candidates last fall, tempers will flare and people will feel slighted. Let’s remove ourselves from attacking one individual attempting to make reparations to a broken system and move forward with fixing the problems at hand.

Best,

James Landreneau

Swanson School of Engineering

2012 SGB president and 2011 SGB Board member

To the Editor,

I am writing in response to the news story “Former SGB candidates object to election-day truce.” I am pleased to see The Pitt News is interested in the elections process; as a fair, smoothly run election is in the best interest of all non-College of General Studies undergraduates. Indeed, this unprecedentedly contentious election saw its share of unprecedented problems. And many changes are going to be considered for the elections code, particularly to the sections concerning the paper campaign, posting restrictions, endorsements and slates. Additionally, my hope is that throughout the campaign, our committee will foster a spirit of civility among the candidates in the next election. I also expect the Pitt community to care enough about our student government to hold the committees and Board accountable for their actions.

However, the portrait that the article and editorial paint of 2012 Elections Chairwoman Annie Brown could not be further from the mark. Annie, like all of us, might be imperfect, but she was faced with many difficult decisions throughout the election season. Honestly, few people involved in the campaign acted as saints, and Annie prevented much of the escalating pettiness. Pinning all the problems in the last election on one person is too easy a solution. Annie has been extremely instructive in ways that similar problems can be avoided in the future. She is far from incompetent or partial, and I can say, considering the difficulties she faced, I have big shoes to fill.

Sincerely,

Aaron Gish

Dietrich School of Arts and Sciences

Chairman, Elections Committee

sgb.elections@gmail.com