punditry.ca — uncovering DSU elections

First thing’s first: Congratulations to Shannon, Mark, Rob, Kris, Janet, Adam, Meredith, Shane, and Glenn, and thanks to all of the candidates for putting so much time and effort into your campaigns and keeping me entertained.

This being my seventh and final DSU Election as a student, I thought I’d compile a personal highlight reel of the past eleven days. Two photos from last night’s results party festivities serve as bookends to this entry.

The Ghost of Executives Past makes an appearance at the 2009 DSU Election Results Party at the Grawood

- Hobbes sticking up for Jennex at the Studley debate: I didn’t really know Mark before this campaign, but he proved himself to be a stand-up guy when he could have taken advantage of his opponent being attacked. Both Mark and Craig ran strong campaigns, which was reflected in the 35-vote difference in the final results.

- I’m still not entirely comfortable with the way NSPIRG became a campaign issue, and, in particular, the way the debate was focused on the presidential race, but it deserves mention given the amount of attention it is getting. I’ll be writing more about this matter in the coming days as The AGM: Part II approaches.

- Janet Conrad’s candidate profile photo: I’ve watched enough America’s Next Top Model to identify when someone knows how to use their angles and find the light source.

- My buddy Eric Snow went from rule-maker to rule-breaker by racking up some post-campaigning fines.

- The Evolution of Debo: Is it just me, or is Greg getting a bit better with each election? Sure, he still has inappropriate outbursts and does silly things like drink five large teas during a debate, but every once in a while when you get past his demeanour, you find a reasonable idea. This seems to be happening more frequently these days. I must say, even though he would lump me in with the DSU “in crowd”, I appreciate what Greg is trying to do and that he has a genuine interest in getting people engaged with what goes on at the DSU. I might not agree with all of his ideas, but I’ve got to admit, campaigns would be a lot less interesting if he weren’t running.

- Shannon’s closing remarks at the Presidential debate are a perfect example of why I supported her campaign. Without any prepared notes, she spoke of the significance of this campaign for her, and of her love for the DSU and for Dalhousie. It was obviously genuine and indicative of why she’s well-suited to be President. Her passion for the DSU is contagious, which is something we need from our Executive if we have any hope of sparking interest in what we do. I anxiously await the DVD release of the debate so I can provide
a transcript of her remarks.

Some post-results dancing at Reflections with these fools (photo: John Hurley)

I’ll post my recap of the Presidential Debate later this afternoon, I promise.  There’s still one more day of voting left, and I really can’t resist the urge to ask Debo what the heck was with the 5 (non-reusable) cups of tea/coffee.

In other news, for those of you who don’t incessently troll the comments like I do, SMAC is having an information shin-dig outside the Killam library TODAY at 4:00pm.  I, for one, would not miss this for the world.  The last time SMAC had a “public” organizing meeting, all accounts (I wasn’t there) were that the perceived “pro DSU” types found themselves not welcome.  Let’s see if “fostering critical thought” works both ways for SMAC this afternoon…

These days of voting seem to drag on.  Everyone is done campaigning and just wants the whole business to be over, ideally with their preferred names at the top of the ballot.  

Just over 38 hours to go; in the meantime, here are the day’s events.

• A day of endorsements on punditry.ca; scroll down for details.

• 30 predictions of winners in so far; it’s not too late to make your own.  Seeing surprising agreement on the winners given what we thought were close races.  Also, some of our loyal readers, whom we love, are clearly nuts, and others are not very good with The Maths.  Deadline is 6pm today.

• Two fines were handed down by the elections committee today, $20 to Snow and $10 to LeForte.  Neither of them is in any way close to disqualification, but I’m sure Snow would rather use the $20 to buy any 5 things from this list.

• I can now tell you that 311 students voted in the advance polling on Friday.  No totals available for today.

• I took a look through my files, and the last time a referendum question asked for the ability to raise premiums it won 65-35.  The time limit on that question was “until the academic year 2007-2008″.  I sincerely hope the price of DSU’s health plan didn’t go up this year in direct contravention to the Will Of The Students.

• The Gazette covered the presidential debate; my favorite part is the picture.

• The latest updates re SMAC, which has somehow become relevant in this election:
  • I’m told SMAC, the force behind the controversial AGM motions, has emerged from the shadows with an official website.  Right now that domain name is actually a redirect to http://no-atlantica.org/smobilize/, use the direct link if you hate it (as I do) when URL masking is used.  
  • By the way, I’ve heard a lot of indignation and even anger from those astonished that people would associate SMAC with NSPIRG.  Guys, when your website is hosted in parallel with an NSPIRG campaign, and your two contact people are (respectively) heavily involved in a NSPIRG working group and the founder of another NSPIRG campaign, you can’t be surprised when people draw a link.  Do what you can to distance yourself, by all means, but “indignation” is the wrong emotion. 
  • That leads me to my question – if any SMAC people are around, what I’m looking for is a clear and simple answer: why not work through NSPIRG?  Your contact people, at least, are both already closely associated with NSPIRG projects.  You guys are ideologically in sync.  They have funding and full-time staffers and office space.  Making SMAC a working group of NSPIRG is almost an obvious decision to me.  Why didn’t you?

• Last night I told you how voters decide for whom to vote.  A related stat: the top 3 ways voters hear about elections for the first time are from the candidate directly (39%), from the posters on the walls (30%), and through word-of-mouth (21%).  Yes folks, I’d say the primary driver of voter turnout is the candidates themselves.

Busy day, compared to every other campaign Sunday I’ve ever seen.  8 posts on punditry.ca today, not counting this one, so remember to scroll down and read if you haven’t yet…

• Tomorrow is the last day of campaigning; elections materials come down at 8pm.  Get your fill of candidate websites now, there will be a quiz at the end of the ballot.  
  

  Rob LeForte's kittens endorse his candidacy.

• Today was a day of endorsements.  SustainDal endorsed Snow, Hobbs, LeForte, Horne, and Perron-Welch; the Dalhousie-Kings Conservatives apparently endorsed Snow and Hobbs; and Lisa endorsed Zimmerman.  (Also LeForte’s kittens endorsed him.)

• A few surprises there – I would have thought Janet Conrad was a shoo-in for a SustainDal endorsement given her DSUSO credentials, but I guess not.  I had a chuckle at her “it’s not true until it’s on the internet” comment (I paraphrased).  I understand the necessity of examining only those thing candidates put into writing, though I agree it is unfortunate.  DKC stopped after Snow and Hobbs; were the rest of the candidates simply unacceptable?  It’s not like Snow and Hobbs are chugging the Conservative kool-aid.  If it’s about NSPIRG, why didn’t Rai get the nod as well?

• I suspect we will see more endorsements – the JSA usually issues a set, and sometimes A-level societies do as well.  Obviously if you hear of any, let us know.

• Zimmerman joined Snow in calling for an NSPIRG referendum, but it seems she put a bit of distance between her position and his other points.  This news broke during the punditry.ca debate and was posted to her blog.

• punditry.ca hosted the first ever DSU online debate.  I think it went well; though the medium is far from perfect, it has some advantages including the availability of a full transcript.  Thanks to the candidates for adapting well to the software used.  Debogorski couldn’t make it, but I posted his answers to some of the questions.

• Speaking personally, running the debate was a challenge: the technical set up took a while but I did it at my own pace.  For the 2 hours of the debate itself, in addition to moderating the discussion I was carrying on up to 10-15 conversations with people who wanted to ask questions and killing off unruly users (no calling the cops in this house, I /kill first and ask questions later).

• I had an amusing conversation earlier.  Someone sent me a note saying that SustainDal had issued endorsements.  This was news, so I fired up the old web browser to verify the story and post it to punditry.ca.  ”Where did you hear this news?” I asked.  ”… on your site,” came the response.  Heh.  Thanks Mark Coffin for staying on top of these things.

• The Gazette has added two web-only articles, one on the Studley forum and the other on the AGM.

• Glenn Blake promised in a forum that as Senator, he’ll keep us up to date with a blog about the Dal Senate.  That blog has now been created, and he promises to update following the election.

• Janet Conrad has updated her blog and Facebook group with more details about her run at BoG.

• The Facebook group explaining Eric Snow’s position on NSPIRG is seeing some actual conversation, but is hard to find if you don’t know where it is.

• Other candidates with website updates include Horne, Snow, Jennex.

• On the lighter side, the comparison of candidate photos to PM photos was good for a laugh.

• Say what you want about STOP NSPIRG, they’ve done a great job at making their issue a central issue of this election.  Their website includes the statements from the two presidential candidates as well as an amusing list of other things you can do with $4.

• On the other side of the debate, NSPIRG invites you to join them on March 3rd to discuss the corporatization of campus, and to organize efforts to combat this.

• 5000 page views from 700 unique visitors.

Part of the reason I haven’t reoffered my services to the DSU electorate is simply that I feel a majority of the fierce debates student politicians have are quite useless. For example, topics that have captivated the DSU exec and council lately include:

• What should the format of our website be? (This is a no-brainer, it should be something that is accessible to users on computers outside of Soviet Russia)
• Should we have one member at large on council, or three?
• Should we have a handbook for the recruitment committee?
• What should we order for food: Indian or Thai?

While important issues (like I expect of our annual budget) often pass by with little or no debate.

But today, he’s done it. An issue worth talking about. Now, not only is Mr. Snow a better writer than Ms. Zimmerman, there’s actually a difference between them worth discussing!

Eric’s latest facebook group (a bad idea in my opinion, I hate redundant groups) is used for him to voice his opposition to NSPIRG. While he doesn’t tie himself to the official petition, he does essentially say what their saying, with more diplomatic and politically correct words. I am however impressed at how strong his wording is.

Here is what he says he will do to take action on NSPIRG:

GIVING STUDENTS A CHOICE, THROUGH A REFERENDUM, ON THE FUTURE OF NSPIRG’S LEVY – It should be the choice of all students, not the DSU Executive or Council, to determine whether or not the levy for NSPIRG will continue. All students deserve to have a say.

ENSURING ACCOUNTABILITY FROM NSPIRG: EQUAL TREATMENT FOR ALL SOCIETIES – With or without a levy, NSPIRG has to be held accountable for its actions and the actions of its working group. Creating separate names for groups like SCAW or SMAC, with overlap in membership and resources, cannot continue to be used as a method of escaping accountability.

HOLDING INDIVIDUALS RESPONSIBLE FOR THEIR OWN ACTIONS – A member of the NSPIRG staff has struck one of the DSU Executive. There have been accusations of vandalism in the SUB and across the Dalhousie campuses. While there is a due process to follow, holding individuals responsible for their actions is necessary if we are to have a safe student community.

I am surprised he hasn`t mentioned anything about kicking them out of the building. That is valuable space, and I`m sure there are lots of other societies that would be interested in getting some community space on campus.

What does Shannon say on the subject? Nothing. Neither her blog, website nor her facebook group say anything on the subject.

Either Eric is playing strategy here, or he really hates NSPIRG. The strategist in him likely knows that he is either in a tie or lagging closely behind his chief opponent. When you consider the fact that Shannon’s been passively working on this campaign for three years, I wouldn’t expect any opponent of her’s to be doing well either. The PIRG portion of your platform may just throw you over the top, Eric. Essentially, it all comes down to which side has more voters on it. Judging from the turnout at our AGM, NSPIRG has about half as many people willing to come out and support them than do those who are either undecided or in support of the STOPNSPIRG approach. The challenge, being this late in the game, is getting the word out with only about two full days left of campaigning.

I for one, cannot wait until this topic comes up in monday’s debate.

Post-post note: 

I realize that Eric was never silent about his feelings toward PIRG, but throughout the campaign he has been purposely diplomatic about NSPIRG,  not mentioning what most of us have assumed to be his true feelings. 

We will now take a break from your regular campaign coverage for this brief side-story:

Over the last few days I have had some e-mails from Dal students I know who rather unsurprisingly have never heard of NSPIRG. Since it is coming up a lot in conversation and candidates are beginning to directly address perceived issues with the group I thought it would be nice to give the average voter a bit of a primer. I am attempting to make this post as fair and balanced as possible (seriously, I’m not channeling Fox News over here), but once the post is up I will revert to expressing my own stance on the direction of the group.

PIRGs are Public Interest Research Groups. They are non-profit organizations often affiliated at the provincial (or state) level. The first PIRG was established in the 1970s by consumer advocate Ralph Nader. The stated goals of the initial PIRG movements are very different than the modern groups we know. Some PIRGs are part of an international or national grouping and others are independently chartered.

The majority of the 200+ PIRGs in existence are housed on university campuses. NSPIRG (Nova Scotia Public Interest Research Group) is not at all unique in being housed on the Dalhousie campus. It is also not at all unique in receiving levy-based funding from university students. Most of the PIRGs associated with universities do this and there has been controversy at many schools, on both sides of the issue. PIRGs have been challenged, de-funded, removed entirely, reinstated and left alone at various times throughout their histories. NSPIRG, like most of the provincial PIRGs, works on a consensus decision making model. To my knowledge and from my initial research into the organization (back in 2004) there are about 15 active PIRGs throughout Canada.

You may read up on PIRGs and hear about the Fund for Public Interest Research, which is a door-to-door and telemarketing capital campaign for US-PIRG affiliated groups. It is important to note that NSPIRG is not affiliated with that network (no Canadian PIRG is) and therefore they do not receive funding through that method. Canadian PIRGs are all funded through student levies (if applicable/not rescinded/etc.) on the campus they are affiliated with.

NSPIRG was founded (officially) in 1990. As a result of a referendum question all students (full time) at Dalhousie contribute $2.00 per semester to the operations of NSPIRG. Part-time students contribute half that. They are also required by mandate to allow students to opt-out of the levy and must advertise those up-out periods. The number of students choosing to do this is historically low and there is much debate as to why. I am not going to entertain that debate here. The 2007-2008 operating budget of NSPIRG was $64,792.00 and you can view their budget here. More than $39,000 of that budget goes to staff salaries. After some issues related to adhering to the DSU Society Policy there have been some updates made to the NSPIRG constitution, however the most recent one I can find can be viewed here.
Read more…

I’ll bet that this is going to be a slow night. The presidential debates have been pushed to Monday, and everyone who is anyone is living it up at the great big circle-jerk that is Student Appreciation Night. Not me though – I’m currently in the library, telling myself over and over again that wizards are probably lame anyway. I wonder if Greg is doing anything…

Anyway, I had a funny picture of the Stop NSPIRG petitioners outside the SUB that I was going to post, but I left my uplink cable at home, so…yeah.

A wise man (ie: me) once told me a story that I would like to pass on to you all before I head out for the night.

A young vegan boy with a beautiful butterfly cupped in his hand once walked up to an old man who was dining on a McDonald’s hamburger. The old man snatched the butterfly away, and ate it whole without a moment’s pause.

The little boy looked up at the old man with tears in his eyes, and the old man smiled.

“Child, you have learned a valuable lesson here today.”

The child was confused.

“But what is the lesson, sir?”

The old man tossed his styrofoam packaging over his shoulder, and leaned in close so the young boy could hear his every word.

“You are young and idealistic, but I am a jackass. No matter how hard you try to change the world I have created, you will never succeed. For every animal you don’t eat, I will eat two.”

Though understandably disturbed by having just watched an old man devour a butterfly live, the young boy recognized the wisdom in his elder’s words, and immediately began preparing for the GMAT so that he might one day enter a respectable MBA programme.

Think about it.

One last observation:

Really?

I could really go for a double quarter pounder with cheese right about now.