SGB debates the future of elections

Tradition and technology clashed Tuesday night as SGB debated the future of campus voting. … Tradition and technology clashed Tuesday night as SGB debated the future of campus voting.

SGB voted 6-2 Tuesday night to postpone their vote on whether to move elections online. Board members hope that a one-week delay will allow for further investigation of the student body’s interest in changing SGB elections

Moving elections online raises some concerns regarding the quality and the outcome of the elections. The system SGB would use would be similar to the one used for Homecoming elections and would be accessed through the http://my.pitt.edu portal. Students would be able to see a picture and access information about the candidates when they cast their ballot. The system would require voters to confirm their choice before it is submitted.

Board member Zach Ransom hopes that by moving the elections online, disenfranchised students abroad or students unable to make it to traditional polling places will be able to vote. Ideally, the new system would produce a larger and more informed body of voters.

Board members said that online voting is a trend in universities similar to Pitt — Board Member Dilinus Harris used Georgetown University as an example — and that implementing the system would cost less and reduce human error in tabulating votes.

While SGB is moving toward a vote next week, they still need to fill the elections chair formally held by Andrew Powers. Board member Joe Pasqualichio said that a vote should not be held until a chair has been named and cites Panther Central as an influence for the rush.

“Panther Central shouldn’t influence our decisions. We should take this issue to the students.”

Traditionally, SGB polling has taken place at various locations around campus. Candidates used these locations as opportunities for last minute campaigning. Online voting would eliminate the need for polling stations.

“On the one hand, [polling stations] are tradition and I would like to see it continue, but it’s more important to get more students to vote. We still want to allow candidates to be outside Towers and the Union campaigning that day, but instead of telling people to go into a booth to vote, they’ll be telling them to go to a computer,” Ransom said.

“[Online voting] was bound to happen. We should take this time to develop the system before the elections,” board member Jennifer Anukem said.

Students at the meeting voiced their concerns to the board. Former board member Matt Hutchinson believes that online voting will have a higher risk of being corrupted by interest groups. “If voting goes online it will be easier for student groups to force people into voting,” Hutchinson said.

According to SGB President Brian Kelly, “Coercion would be covered under the Student Code of Conduct.”

While it would be possible to monitor IP addresses through the system, responding to any type of corruption of the voting system would be difficult.

“Even if you knew about corruption, what would you do?” SGB advisor Joyce Giangarlo said.

“The benefits outweigh the concerns of the new system,” board member Rebekah Bambling said.

“The decision to go online doesn’t eliminate polling places. We could set up polling places at kiosks and we would still save money without losing the feel of having a polling place. We could still monitor voting,” board member Jarrod Baker said.