Next month, members of the classes of 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006 will elect a graduating senior to serve as Young Alumni Trustee, a full-fledged member of the University's Board of Trustees. The candidates — Azalea Kim, Matt Margolin and Antoinette Seaberry — have agreed to refrain from campaigning.
Though all three of the candidates are familiar to most students, having each served in prominent student government positions, their collective decision to refrain from campaigning is a disservice to the voters in the upcoming election. For a position as important as Trustee of the University, students deserve to know what — not just who — they are voting for.
Without campaigning, the Young Alumni Trustee election risks becoming a popularity contest rather than a genuine debate over important issues that will affect the future of the University. In the absence of an open campaign, voters have no indication of the values the candidates will stand for as a Trustee.
A careful analysis of their past records of service might provide some idea of the candidates' positions on important matters; however, it is highly unlikely that most voters will have the time or interest to pore over the record of the candidates' stances on key issues. Furthermore, we cannot be entirely sure that the candidates' past records will indicate their future positions on important matters.
Campaign platforms also define the issues candidates believe to be important and serve as an accountability mechanism once a person has been elected. An open campaign would allow students to have a substantive dialogue with the candidates about their priorities as Young Alumni Trustee. Then, once a candidate was elected, there would be a public record of his or her intentions and goals. This record would allow voters to hold the new trustee accountable to them during his or her term in office.
Whoever wins this election will serve the University and shape its future for the next four years. This is a serious responsibility — both for the candidates and for the voters who make the final decision. It's about time we know what we're voting for.
Read More
The CPUC must not gut its Judicial Committee
Bill HewittEnding the Judicial Committee’s jurisdiction over initial complaints would embolden abuses of power, allowing the administration to evade accountability for University rule violations without the pressure of student and faculty authority.
Ending the Judicial Committee’s jurisdiction over initial complaints would embolden abuses of power, allowing the administration to evade accountability for University rule violations without the pressure of student and faculty authority.
Princeton, let’s adopt a digital prox
Jorge ReyesTo prevent pointless replacement and lockout charges, maximize convenience, and create better access to meals and facilities, Princeton should follow the precedent set by some of its peers and adopt a digital prox system.
To prevent pointless replacement and lockout charges, maximize convenience, and create better access to meals and facilities, Princeton should follow the precedent set by some of its peers and adopt a digital prox system.
What is a Princeton degree really for?
Joel IbabaoSo what, in the end, is a Princeton degree really for? I take a more moderate view: Students should prioritize earning potential — unless they feel irresistibly called to something else.
So what, in the end, is a Princeton degree really for? I take a more moderate view: Students should prioritize earning potential — unless they feel irresistibly called to something else.