Marking a change to the 37 year tradition of an Undergraduate Assembly chair, the new UA President position will now be elected by the over ten thousand members of the undergraduate student body — and not by the 24 deciding UA representatives who voted in years past.
“We deserve a president who can speak on behalf of all of us as undergraduates,” College senior and UA representative Zac Byer said, stressing the importance of student body input in UA elections.
As voted for by the student body in December, the referendum also replaced the Vice Chairman for External Affairs title to a Vice President directly elected by the student body. Two more elected seats within the UA general body were added and several changes were made to the UA constitution as well.
Whether incumbent Chair Alec Webley will be eligible to run for a second term based on the new constitution is still ambiguous. However, Webley stated, “I have absolutely no intention to run for the UA presidency. If nominated I will not run, if elected I will not serve.”
The changes to election policies were proposed early last semester by Byer and College senior and Student Activities Committee Chair Natalie Vernon after they realized that the student body deserved a greater voice in the election of the two highest positions on the UA.
“I imagine I speak for quite a few people out there when I say that it’s more important that the highest elected student leader is in touch with general student concerns than an expert at parliamentary procedure,” Byer said.
Vernon, Byer and other supporters argue that the changes will offer the student body a more direct voice in the elections and hope that such power will incite more interest in student government on campus.
Byer described the change as empowering to students, suggesting that the UA will only gain more credibility in the eyes of the student body by relinquishing the election decision to the general population.
“It’s time to put the high horses in their stables,” he said.
Nominations and Elections Committee Chair Patricia Liu also stressed the power given to the students as a result of the policy changes. She described the voter turnout as an “impressive feat” and anticipates that the efforts and publicity of the past semester will help students “see how much their vote counts for in the grand scheme of things.”
Despite the hopes that the switch to a direct election will increase student engagement, the votes on the two referenda — the first focused on elected positions and the second primarily concerning the UA constitution — barely surpassed the 20 percent voter turnout required for the legislation to pass.
Some, however, believe that the changes from the referenda will encourage more campaign-driven individuals to run for election.
In an editorial for the Daily Pennsylvanian in December, Engineering senior Daniel Sanchez and Wharton freshman Hunter Horsley, both current UA representatives, criticized the proposal. They noted that the changes have the potential to “weaken the substance and experience necessary for elections.”
Sanchez also added that increases in student participation might not always be as advantageous as they may initially appear — and could have the potential to adversely affect future UA policy changes.
“I think that interest will increase but, unfortunately, [it] may be filled with false expectations,” Sanchez said. “We should expect to see a flurry of impossible campaign promises if the election winds up very close, and the candidates must maneuver for as many votes as possible.”
More recently, however, Sanchez said that progress has been made to ensure that the spring semester elections for the president and vice president positions are both effective and fair.
After the referenda passed, there was significant debate over requirements to run for the two positions, ranging from signature requirements to quizzed student government information sessions.
As Byer explains, “there are still significant barriers, but these barriers are inherently inclusive.”
Even with these checks, Sanchez expressed concerns regarding the election’s “effectiveness from a policy perspective” but acknowledged that the UA, NEC, Penn Student Government and Debate Commission all have the best interests of the students and UA in mind and are “working hard to make this experiment as painless, legitimate and effective as possible.”
The Daily Pennsylvanian is an independent, student-run newspaper. Please consider making a donation to support the coverage that shapes the University. Your generosity ensures a future of strong journalism at Penn.
DonatePlease note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.