BY AMELIA POSSANZA

In print | Published April 23, 2009

On the eve of the Student Council presidential elections, an anonymous, student-generated push to encourage students to vote “None of the Above” on the ballot emerged as a response to the low number of Student Council candidates and to a perceived inadequacy in those candidates running. The push, commonly referred to as the NOTA campaign despite the absence of an explicit leadership and agenda, manifested itself in the form of posters, e-mails, word of mouth and discussions on the comments forum of the Daily Gazette website.

The campaign had no leaders and was not affiliated with any other campus groups. Danielle Noble ’12 called the term “campaign” a misnomer. “Anyone who agrees with [this] perspective is quote unquote part of that campaign,” she said.

The NOTA movement emerged after the presidential debate on Wednesday, April 15 between candidates Rachel Bell ’10 and Shaun Kelly ’10 left several attendees dissatisfied with the quality of debate and the paucity of candidate running. Six students ran for five positions in the election. The presidency was the only contested position.

At a StuCo meeting on Sunday, April 19, members of StuCo emphasized that in the case of a “None of the Above” victory, a second set of elections would occur this semester in order to not lose the current makeup of the student body. This would be in keeping with the constitution.

At midnight on Tuesday, April 21, election results circulated by the current StuCo informed the student body that all five positions had been filled. Additionally, the numbers indicated that a large portion of the student body had voted either “None of the Above” or “No Preference,” with a smaller but also significant number of Write-Ins. Rachel Bell ’10 won the presidency with 292 votes to Shaun Kelly’s ’10 205, and NOTA’s 276.

“I’m happy to have won,” Bell said, “but it was so close that that makes me a bit nervous. At the same time, I feel more inspired to build bridges with the students who ardently supported the campaign … There are a lot of people involved with NOTA, so there’s a lot of outreach I want to do,” she said.

“Despite the outcome, students shouldn’t think it’s over and done. Students should talk about what’s really important to them and how we can represent the student body in a more efficient way,” said President of Student Council Yongjun Heo ’09.

Even though a second set of elections won’t be held, supporters of NOTA maintain that the campaign has already had an impact in opening up a dialogue regarding the inadequacies of StuCo as a governing body out-of-touch with diverse student needs.

Daniel Symonds ’11, a proponent of the NOTA movement who circulated an e-mail elucidating his motivations, still considers the campaign to have had an impact. “Already we’ve shifted the debate,” he said. “In a way, NOTA has already been successful.”

Heo agreed. “I think that it’s a very beneficial thing for all this to have occurred even though it was brought about in a negative light. It will force Rachel to address the issues that were brought up. We’ve seen more now than ever before more NOTA votes for all five positions. This raises the question of how the next student council can work with and work for the student body,” he said.

In his e-mail, Symonds explained that the NOTA campaign was about more than just this election’s particular set of candidates. “We wish to start a campus-wide conversation about the possibility for a new interpretation of Student Council that is more in touch with the needs of our diverse student body.”

He explained that part of the movement’s view of the elections grew out of the presidential debate last Wednesday, during which some perceived that candidates did not demonstrate adequate engagement with or knowledge of IC/BCC and activist groups.

In response to NOTA, Heo invited students to the StuCo meeting on Sunday, April 19 to voice their opinions. The turnout demonstrated the desire of supporters of the movement to have their voices heard. StuCo Vice President Nate Erskine ’10 opened up the discussion. “I would love to hear suggestions of how you think Student Council could reach out and get more people to run,” he said.
While students suggested concrete changes, such as offering clearer job descriptions, they pointed out that restructuring the council itself would invite a greater number of candidates.

“Is there a way that we can collectively re-imagine StuCo?” Sable Mensah ’11 asked. “Why would I vote for something or run for something if it doesn’t affect my day-to-day life? I think StuCo is closer to the administration than to the student body.” Mensah said that she wanted to see a council that is less neutral and more involved in aligning itself with the needs of a diverse student body.

Other students had similar concerns about the council’s and the candidates’ relationship with the students they represent.

Paul Wiggins ’11, president of Swarthmore African-American Student Society, said that he received an e-mail from a candidate several hours before platforms were due requesting a lunch meeting to discuss the concerns of the black community. He and Stephanie Rodriguez ’12, who told a similar story with respect to the Latino community, emphasized that this type of dialogue should be happening year-round — not solely before elections as a campaigning strategy. “Why now?” Rodriguez asked.

Sunday’s meeting generated several concrete suggestions, such as printing a handout explaining StuCo, blogging in place of posting meeting minutes and having a StuCo meet-and-greet during freshman orientation. Members of StuCo also encouraged students to continue attending meetings. “I like this many people coming to our meetings,” said Bell, who emphasized repeatedly throughout her campaign her pledge to reach out to more students and student groups.

Heo echoed this sentiment and added that the campaign succeeded in opening up a forum for student concerns. “There are a number of positives about the NOTA campaign,” he said. “It raises questions about whether candidates are qualified or not qualified.”

Members of the current council and the candidates had a mixed response to the campaign. Before the election, Bell noted that she initially felt personally attacked. “The posters were so vague,” she said. “They didn’t specify why they were disappointed.”

Now that she more fully understands the campaign, however, her views have changed. “I realize the concerns, but I don’t see why that leads to this campaign,” she said. She felt that the candidates who were already running could address the concerns raised by those supporting NOTA without a second set of elections.

She also worried that the NOTA campaign would exacerbate the problem of having a low number of candidates. “It makes the risk of putting yourself out there greater.”

Heo and Marie Rousseau ’12, newly elected Campus Life Representative, have a more positive view of the campaign. “That’s the risk of putting yourself out there,” Heo said. “[The campaign] will prevent people who are simply running just to run.”

Student Groups Advisor Ben Francis ’12, on the other hand, felt that the NOTA campaign overlooked the individual platforms. “The problem with this particular campaign is that it has not focused on the specific candidates themselves in the uncontested positions. Instead, it has just focused on the fact that there is no opposition,” he said.

For those who supported NOTA, the point of the movement was to go beyond the specific candidates to address larger issues. “It’s not simply just ‘None of the Above’ as an attack on these candidates, but more of a no confidence vote in our student government,” Symonds said.

Symonds cited the financial justice campaign last semester as an instance when Student Council could have stepped in to help the student cause. “Student Council is in such a weak position and we feel that Student Council’s role at Swarthmore should be one of a much more strong advocate for student concerns,” Symonds said. He believes that the council has the opportunity to affect even more change in the context of the current financial crisis.

Cecilia Marquez ’11 does not consider herself part of a formal campaign, but she also chose to vote NOTA for all positions for similar reasons. “For me personally as a student on this campus, a Student Council president has to come to the position with an understanding of the IC and BCC communities,” she said.

Like Mensah and Symonds, she cited the council’s neutrality as another reason for her decision. “Student Council is not willing to take a stance on anything,” Marquez said. “It’s become this thing where you show up and do your term and there’s not a progression towards anything.” She wants to see a council that makes better use of its access to influential spaces such as the Board of Managers meetings.

In direct response to the NOTA campaign, a group of anonymous students operating under the name OOTA posted flyers around campus encouraging students vote for “One of the Above.” On the fliers, OOTA leaders described the movement as “a secret underground organization for democratic efficiency whose sole purpose is to combat NOTA.”

The campaigning tactics of OOTA were also discussed at the Sunday StuCo meeting. OOTA signs were posted around campus and on an IC board, which upset many in the IC community because they felt it was a personal attack. This parody echoes students’ complaints about the anonymity of NOTA that have appeared in the numerous Daily Gazette comments and during the Student Council meeting. “There was a big blame game,” said Bell of the Gazette comments. “That’s the problem with [the campaign] being anonymous.”

The placement of posters also raised questions about this anonymity. Some students felt that having posters on an IC board falsely linked the campaign to their groups. “I feel that I have personally been stigmatized, just that I’m part of that community,” Lisa Sambat ’10 said.

In an e-mail to students, Heo called the posters “an intrusion of IC space.” The e-mail continued, “Student Council would like to make sure that these spaces are free from disturbance.”

NOTA was not the first campaign of its type. In the fall of 2005, the “None of the Above” option received more votes than the Student Council Appointments Chair candidate Ethan Ucker ’07. This result was in part due to a similar campaign.

Following its constitution, Student Council held a new election the next semester, this time without Ucker.

The “None of the Above” option in the StuCo election procedure also gained attention in the spring of 2007, when students received an anonymous e-mail recommending they vote NOTA for the fall 2007 council. At the time, students cited the candidates’ inadequate responses to IC and BCC concerns as a reason they chose to align themselves with the campaign.

« RETURN TO NEWS

« PREV ARTICLE | NEXT ARTICLE »