In an effort to reduce election ambiguity, SGB unanimously approved a new elections code… In an effort to reduce election ambiguity, SGB unanimously approved a new elections code Tuesday night.

The new election code is the work of two separate committees once headed by Andrew Powers, who resigned at the beginning of the semester, and now chaired by Greg Heller-LaBelle.

Heller-LaBelle gave insight into the major concerns of the new elections code.

“I think that the big thing is that they tried to limit unenforceable laws,” Heller-LaBelle said.

Board members, like Dilinus Harris, were concerned about the vagueness of the old code.

“There was so much discrepancy and ambiguity in roles and words like ‘position’ or ‘title’ or ‘office.’ With four potential presidential candidates and so many board candidates and so much drama that could happen, it’s better to have [the elections code] clear-cut, cold, with less room for ambiguity,” he said.

Changes to the code give student organizations more freedom in campaigning, endorsing and advertising for candidates.

“It’s going to be great for student organizations because you can’t tell them how to endorse candidates,” Powers said.

Docking votes, a method of sanctioning candidates by taking away votes for breaking the elections code, are no longer part of the code. Instead, candidates’ $100 deposits will be withheld.

“Getting rid of vote docking is one of the major accomplishments. The voters decided the election,” Heller-LaBelle said.

Online voting procedures are also addressed in the new code. Because of the elimination of polling places, voters will no longer have the option of write-in candidacy. To compensate, the code now allows students to declare late candidacy up until one week before the elections are held.

Late candidates are required to submit a packet with twice the amount of signatures than regular candidates and an essay explaining their late candidacy to be approved by the elections committee.

The role of current SGB members in supporting candidates has also been refined.

Under the new code, SGB board members cannot use their status to endorse candidates. While this clause does not mirror national political practice, some board members believe that it is in the best interest of SGB to try to keep campaigning outside of daily proceedings.

“We can’t be official members of campaigns, but we can voice our opinions,” board member Liz Blasi said.

Harris expressed his satisfaction about the redefinition of roles.

“The decision was made for me. I can’t help anybody. And I’m not going to help anybody, and if anybody asks who they should vote for for president, I’m going to say it’s your decision and look at the choices,” Harris said.

According to Heller-LaBelle, not all members of the board were happy with the limitations of the code, but the elections committee believed that it is important for SGB to continue to function during elections.

“We don’t want meetings to devolve into campaigning. We’d like members to still be able to do their jobs,” Heller-LaBelle said. “You can still support candidates in a number of unofficial ways.”

SGB President Brian Kelly expressed doubt about the new code changing the dynamics of the elections.

“I don’t think it was anything revolutionary, but it did make things clearer,” Kelly said.