Re: Editorial: Board needs reform, March 9-17, 2016.
On March 9, The Charlatan published an article stating the “Electoral Board needs reform.” As a representative on CUSA council and a big supporter of electoral reform, I am in agreement with this statement. There is a growing movement on council and within the CUSA community to change the electoral board, the constitutional board, and hiring committee so they can be more independent. How should this issue be tackled?
The current structure of CUSA’s committees and boards demonstrates an element of democratic openness by having council vote on nominees for these bodies. However, problems exist.
First, several candidates are nominated by members of the executive. This practice has been criticized because of reports of alleged conflicts of interest, with specific board members—either candidates or key supporters of slates—participating in the 2015 and 2016 elections. Second, there is not enough public notice of vacancy filling, so people are unaware of opportunities to become involved with these bodies.
The Charlatan argued CUSA should appoint students who are “far removed from the association’s politics.” While this may help restore some neutral governance on these boards, there must still be some representation from more politically-active students who have an understanding of relevant issues and are familiar with governing documents.
Randomly-assigned nominations would be an ideal correction for board appointments. First, students could voluntarily nominate themselves rather than depend on a nomination from a councillor or executive, which allows more engagement. Second, an open nomination process can limit how much the executive body is perceived as interfering with the composition of committees. A random selection process will be likely to represent more political diversity on committees because there is a greater chance that less dominant political interests will be represented on these bodies.
The hiring committee and judicial boards of the association are designed to provide a voice without the influence of executives—however, the current appointment system allows boards to act more as a rubber-stamping for the executive agenda rather than a non-partisan voice. It is impossible to have an independent and neutral board regardless of the structure for nominations, but we can restrain the power of executives on council by randomly selecting board appointees.
