ASUSU proposes banning campaign house calls
Future student electioneering will have a different look if two bills pass that were introduced to members of the ASUSU Executive Council Tuesday night. The council is set to vote on the bills next week after a second reading.
The first bill — called ECB 2012-03 — proposes an end a practice popularly referred to as “dorm storming,” which is when ASUSU candidates go door to door in residence halls to encourage students to vote for them. The alternative under the bill will be a town hall forum.
Hannah Blackburn, ASUSU Public Relations director, said these town hall meetings will be aptly named Res Hall Town Halls.
If the bill passes, candidates will instead be given the opportunity to mingle with students at an organized forum where they can answer questions and promote campaign platforms.
“It’s a one-night event for students to ask questions — to have a no-pressure environment for voting,” Blackburn said.
Zach Larsen, ASUSU Programming vice president, said he favors the bill because dorm storming annoys students.
“It’s frustrating for the candidates; it’s frustrating for the prospective voters to be constantly harassed by multiple committees,” Larsen said.
Larsen said the Res Hall Town Hall will allow students to find out what each candidate stands for, instead of being pestered all night.
“It’s giving people the option, rather than shoving it down their throats,” Larsen said. “Anytime you can give students options it’s better.”
According to Ryan Baylis, ASUSU Athletics vice president, dorm storming — also referred to as “res-hall calls” — didn’t only annoy on-campus residents, but also instilled resentment.
“You’re generating a lot of animosity toward elections,” Baylis said. “These are freshmen, so it carries over into all their years. I think that’s where a lot of the animosity toward elections comes from, is from these res-hall calls.”
Blackburn said the Res Hall Town Hall will also change candidates’ focuses. She said the meet and greet will will focus the candidates on showing students their plans and positions, instead of racing to be the first candidate to knock on a student’s door.
The other new bill introduced was ECB 2012-02. If passed, this bill will create a standard time frame for student elections, which abolishes the past practice of passing legislation each year that decided when the elections would take place.
“Every year the PR director has to go in and have a reading and change the date on the bill,” Baylis said. “This will make it more generic, so that it’s always the third week of February.”
Some members of the council expressed concern with one line of the bill that proposed charging candidates $100 as collateral. The $100 would be refunded to them upon completion of the race, granted the candidate did not violate any election rules.
Larsen moved to strike the fee from the bill.
Baylis said the $100 refundable fee should stay to hold over candidates heads and keep them from breaking USU rules and policies for the election.
Brook Evans, ASUSU Diversity vice president, said the fee was too high.
“I feel like elections are expensive enough for candidates that $100 is a little much,” Evans said. “Not everyone has $100 laying around.”
Blackburn said the fee wasn’t needed as a safeguard against rule breaking, because the Grievances Board already has a three-strike program to keep candidates in line.
She said after three grievances are filed against a candidate, they’re no longer able to run for election.
After discussion, the council unanimously voted to remove the $100 refundable fee from the bill.
Both bills were motioned for approval as first readings. The second reading and voting on the bills is Tuesday, Oct. 8, during the next ASUSU Executive Council meeting.
– chris.w.lee@aggiemail.usu.edu