Residence Hall v. Academic College Representation

As I compare the new USG representation system with the previous system when I was an officer, I am trying to figure out what type of advantage it is giving to everyone.

The previous model was that representatives were elected by residence hall, the four Greek areas, and a determined number of commuters. The new model is where the freshmen class gets to elect their reps by residential college, the rest of the students elect theirs by academic discipline. The Class Secretary of each year now gets to vote in the GA.

The freshmen get to elect 13 (3 x 4 residential colleges + 1 commuter). Upperclassmen elect 9 from Engineering, 9 from Arts & Sciences, 2 from Nursing, and 2 from Management.

Granted, under the old model, there have been problems of getting interested reps from some of the residence halls. Every year, we may get 2-3 halls with no rep at all, and it takes a semester to find one person who wants to do it. A few times, it would be hard to get all the Greek areas represented. Electing commuter reps has been the worst pain of all. We have almost 1000 commuters, but on average, we have been only able to get at most 5-6 of those spots filled. Getting a good turnout of candidates for a USG election rests on the ability of the Election Commission to get "the word out!" I have been involved with seven USG elections and I have seen good and bad Commissioners. Their performance would usually mirror the turnout of the candidates and election. Often enough, we have not done a good job in getting commuters to come out and vote. We should have worked closely with the Case Commuter Club and ESS on that.

The new model that we have here basically throws the problem with the apathetic residence halls, the Greeks, and the commuters under the rug, and putting a brand new carpet over it. I have to assume in order for the freshmen candidates to be able to campaign at the three residental halls of their specific residential college, they have access to all three buildings. Otherwise, it is pretty much a residence hall rep system for the first-years. A candidate would not need to go over to the two other halls. He/she would just need to get enough people in one building to get him/her elected. Plus, I guess it won't help if all three reps from a residential college all came from one building.

For academic discipline, it's an easy model for representation but does not provide enough accountability. The only two flaws in an election would be for students that have not declared a major and those that are pursuing a double or triple major. I am sure the voting system would likely prompt a student for their choice into which constituency they want to be a part of. For campaigning, how can you rely on the candidate's ability to talk to their constituents? First, who exactly are they? How would you know if a student in your engineering class is actually an engineering major? He/she could be an Arts & Science or a Management major taking an engineering elective? Would the EC provide a list of current students in their major core of study to help "level the playing field?"

Another weakness is how to inform the constituency. For example, we have 9 reps for the College of Engineering. How would they handle the communication? Do they select one of their number to be an acting spokesperson? Do they divide up the students into mini-constituencies? The worse case here is getting overlapping e-mails. But really, who is accountable to who? In addition, how would a "recall" situation work out? You ask a fellow engineering student that elected rep C has not been doing a good job, but he would reply, "Oh I voted for rep A, why should I need to get rid of C?" I think it's just make it harder for students to attempt such a petition (if it is needed).

From what I can see, the new model dilutes the ability of representation. It hides the fact that your commuter population may not be represented by the GA. Plus, it does not help when your first-year commuter rep got elected with 6 out of 11 votes casted. It also hides the presence of a Greek population. I am sure this was created to reflect a better outlook of the student body, but at the sacrifice of accountability? At least you got the Class Officers formally involved with the GA. That was one thing that was needed.

Perhaps this model is needed since we are going with a new Case but somehow the size of the student body does not justify the change. I would expect a size like OSU to do this since their large student population would warrant such a system like this. I wonder how much debate was done on this, and why Greeks/Commuters did not amount any opposition. Anyway, what's done is done, but I hope that the new system gets strongly reviewed by the end of the year. If there are glitches that need to be fixed, they need to be fixed by the end of the year. Students will understand that not everything is perfect on the first try.