Structure determines properties.
Two years of high school chemistry will drill that scientific fact into you, along with the formula PV=nRT.
It is as true in science as it is in government. Electing different government officials temporarily improves the quality of government, but changing its structure can be permanent.
On Monday, federal officials arrested 11 Alabama casino owners, state legislators and lobbyists stemming from an investigation of gambling-related vote buying. This state’s susceptible political structure opened the door to such corrupt officials and behavior. The state government has failed to target ethics reform in the past, and it paid the price this week.
Even innocently outdated and seemingly harmless structural problems can cause major headaches. Searching for these sorts of lapses and fixing them before a monumental collapse is prudent and worthwhile.
As with all large organizations, this university’s structure contains snags as well. Not to the extent as those faced in Montgomery, but they need fixing just the same.
The particular area I would like to address here involves SGA elections. Currently, the regulatory body is the Elections Board, which is made up of recommended students, a political science professor and administrative directors and representatives. It is basically the Federal Election Commission for the SGA.
My qualm is with its puzzling placement within the Student Affairs division of the University. The head administrative directors of the board primarily serve as directors of the Ferguson Center, which falls under the Housing and Residential Communities branch of Student Affairs. The other administrator represents Student and Campus Life, which also falls under the housing branch.
Moving the Elections Board to the Student Involvement and Leadership branch of Student Affairs makes much more sense. Elections are no longer held at the Ferg since they are now held online; thus, restructuring is necessary.
Ferg directors have other responsibilities that do not directly relate with students anyway. Bringing in directors that are already involved with students in SGA will allow for better communication and will lessen the Ferg’s burden.
Since the SGA Constitution and Code of Laws do not outline specific election procedures, the Elections Board is tasked with handling the yearly election guidelines. Unless the board has contact with the student body, proactive changes cannot be made. Also, directors from a more student-oriented branch can set their priorities to manage election season more effectively.
If a candidate for office does not feel as though reporting a campaign dispute or potential violation will amount to any action, the board loses its purpose. Having directors who already have a relationship with students works to alleviate that disconnect.
This may resemble a small point of contention, and it is. However, the small issues add up after enough of them are dismissed for their supposed unimportance. Bigger issues are more visible and carry more weight, but the smallest strains can hamstring large reforms.
Waiting until something is broken to fix it does not apply when that something may be broken but has gone unnoticed or forgotten.
Contested SGA elections have occurred in past years, and reforms such as reducing voting time were implemented after the fact. More can be done though to prevent misconduct and the subsequent distrust in the election process.
The structure of election regulation determines the properties of elections, which determine the quality of elected officials.
The Elections Board may only matter a few times a year, but the effects of elections last the entire year. We should not wait until it is too late to demand reform.
Wesley Vaughn is a junior majoring in public relations and political science. His column runs on Wednesdays.
