The Pitt News Editorial Board declines to endorse the presumptive winner of the Student Government Board Presidency, Mike Nites. This is not because of his lack of qualifications or proposals, but because overlooking a much larger issue at hand in this editorial would be a disservice to the Pitt student body.

Due to the small field of candidates entered in this year’s election, all but two of the candidates will earn seats on the Board come January. Though students may feel discouraged by the small field of candidates, ignoring the online ballot entirely today is an unwise move.

During this election, students have the ability to make a decision that could potentially make the selection process for Board members more accessible to a wider range of candidates.

Through a decision by the SGB Constitutional Review Committee, a referendum has been included on the ballot that, if passed, would reduce the number of candidates for which students could vote from six to four. These four votes would include three for Board members and one for president.

Some may argue that the limiting of votes creates an inherently undemocratic process.

As it currently stands, however, the voting system does not lend itself to creating a diverse Board. Having the ability to vote a majority onto the Board will only heighten the likelihood of the same student groups — often those who market themselves as megaslates, whether explicitly or implicitly — sitting on the Board.

This is problematic for a healthy student democracy.

Students must seriously consider the referendum and support this concrete step in making a change to how our student government representatives are elected to their positions.

This referendum correctly acknowledges that the current system is flawed, but changes should not stop here.

Independent candidates are disadvantaged under the current system, and will continue to be disadvantaged should the four-person voting structure pass through. Uninformed or indifferent voters are more likely to vote for an entire slate because they appear as neat packages of three candidates. This lends itself to voting for entire slates and a presidential candidate.

Until students voice their support of a complete election process overhaul and call for a predominantly independent-candidate campaign structure, the four-vote structure will take a positive step toward a more diverse and deserving Board.