Congratulations to the President and Vice President elect and the Members of the 78th ASUN Senate

As promised, some brief analysis.

• Jose won by an 8-point margin
• Sadykova won by a 14-point margin
• All 5 incumbent senators won reelection. The only ASUN insider to lose was Shirley Diaz, although it was inevitable for an insider to lose in that race.
• 14 men and 8 women were elected to the Senate
• About 12 percent of the undergraduate student body voted, about the same as in the past few years
• Both advisory funding questions passed by more than 60 percent of the vote
• The closest race, in the School of Journalism, was decided by three votes

Once we have the numbers, we will compare voter turnout rates by college.

The most surprising result from this election was student support for increased fees. By significant margins, both questions passed. It is evidence that even in times of increased tuition and fees, students are willing to pay additional fees for specific programs and services.

Also of note is how smoothly this election was conducted. Major kudos to Commission Chair Jeremiah Todd and his entire crew. Their hard work is apparent and they deserve our praise. Great job, guys!

2010 ASUN General Election Uncertified Results

Winners in bold; NOTA stands for none of the above. Some analysis later.

President of the Associated Students
Charlie Jose-850
Casey Stiteler-713

Vice President of the Associated Students
Shirley Diaz-657
Leissan Sadykova-855

Senator for the College of Agriculture, Biotechnology, and Natural Resources (2 seats)
Jeffrey Fine-49
Corey Jokerst-78
Randy Pares-38
Chelsea Truax-61
NOTA-0

Senator for the College of Business Administration (3 Seats)
Jake Butera-151
Richard Corn-117
Jacob Crawley-91
Mathew Neben (Incumbent)-157
NOTA-20

Senator for the College of Education (2 seats)
Ashlee Benton-35
Jourdan Douglas-17
Edna Meza-43
David Ronan-48

Senator for the College of Engineering (2 Seats)
Alexandria Hill-70
Adam Khan-70
Roger Przybyla-53
NOTA-16

Senator for the College of Liberal Arts (8 Seats)
Joseph Barrett-124
Brandon Bishop (Incumbent)-231
Mitch Bottoset (Incumbent)-162
Samuel Crampton-144
Christopher Day-164
Branden Jung-167
Tatiana Kosyrkina-113
Lea Moser (Incumbent)-187
Ann Newsome (Incumbent)-164
Joey Nizuk-123
Jesus Palma-242
Jordan Weaver-119
NOTA-58

Senator for the College of Science (2 Seats)
Joseph Agor-38
Angel Arias-33
Jennifer Masters-54
Natasha Monga-87
Lauren Riley-74
NOTA-0

Senator for the Division of Health Sciences (2 Seats)
John Haller-51
Reynaldo Veloz-67
Kim Williams-70

Senator for the School of Journalism
Jonathan Moore-61
Misha Ray-59

Ballot Question 1- JV $5 Art Fee
Yes-865
No-506

Ballot Question 2- JV $25 Student Support Services Fee
Yes-855
No-534

Flashback to 2006

Taking no opinion on the votes expressed here, notice anything amiss?

Bragging rights go to the first person to answer what is wrong and cite to some authority.

Sweet, sweet video evidence

At the risk of giving Mitch Bottoset and Chris Day attention they do not deserve, we give you this YouTube video.



Pay particular attention at the 2:30 mark in the video. A couple of thoughts.

The Code of Elections makes it a violation to "[use] ASUN authority, facilities, funds, or resources for campaign purposes." Section 14(b)(5). A plain reading of that statute seems to indicate that filming campaign videos in ASUN offices is prohibited.
 
Bottoset and Day (probably for show, given this is intended to be a funny campaign video) appear to pick the lock to ASUN Vice President Charlie Jose's office. Ignoring whether they actually picked the lock, were they authorized to enter that office? If yes, then the only issue is the issue above. If no, is this trespassing or gaining unauthorized entry to an office, in violation of the System Code and state criminal law?

Update: As I initially suspected, the candidates state they were authorized to be in the office. As to my first question, they indicate that even the Election Commission is unclear about how the statute should be applied. Personally, I am torn as to whether this particular instance should be prohibited, never mind if it actually is. In any event, it's clear that this particular statute needs some tweaking to cure its vagueness.

A sure way to lose a debate and a giant in the room

A great way to lose a debate: agree with your opponent(s). That is all Jacob Camp, candidate for ASUN President, did in last week's debate. I'm pleased to see the Nevada Sagebrush picked up on this, which was, to several observers of the debate, a giant gorilla in the room. So kudos to the Sagebrush for paying attention to and reporting on the details that mattered. I don't think it's a stretch to say, as far as ASUN coverage is concerned, this is so far the best issue under Editor-in-Chief Jessica Fryman.

That said, there was another giant in the room during the "debate," (available online here--apologies for poor audio) and it wasn't Eli Reilly's epic ego or Casey Stiteler's sense of entitlement, not even Jacob Camp's love fest (but no homo!). It was how painfully obvious how woefully unfamiliar the candidates are--even insiders!--with what ASUN is.

You want to know what ASUN is? An excellent--nay, the only--place to start is with the charter document, the ASUN Constitution, included below for your reading pleasure. For, in the words of "West Wing" character Toby Ziegler, referring to the U.S. Constitution, "in all it is the owner's manual and we should read what it has to say!"

Constitution of the Associated Students of the University of Nevada, 2007

What should we take away from that reading? A few things.

1. ASUN is an association composed of every undergraduate student at Nevada.
2. The purpose of the undergraduate student body in establishing ASUN under this constitution is, according to the Preamble, to "advance our interests, set forth our duties, and provide for meaningful participation in the governance of our University." Basically, look after the interests of all undergrads.
3. The association is governed by a tripartite representative government, and it looks a hell of a lot like the federal government. Although true, this is a government composed of students (i.e. "student government"), it is a government nonetheless.
4. ASUN is governed under a rule of law.

Now that you've read the ASUN Constitution, we have a framework within which to review the debate. The most evident conclusion is that no candidate is familiar with the owner's manual, the ASUN Constitution. Even Jacob Camp, who claimed superiority over his opponents because he had a copy with him, botched a most basic issue about which offices are created in the constitution. His response after the debate was, "oops."

Particularly with the vice presidential candidates, each has a notion of what the vice president should be, not what it is under the constitution. For those who are curious, the vice president's only constitutional obligations are to be able to succeed to the presidency if need be, to preside over the Senate during judicial impeachments, and do what the Senate or President delegate. That's it. All the jockeying of who is better for diversity was pointless.

I know this next point is nitpicky, but precision with language matters.

• Legislator, n., a member of a legislature
• Legislature, n., a body composed of legislators
• Legislation, n., a written document legislators debate in a legislature

The terms are never interchangeable. Get these right or you'll lose life points.

Last point, universal among the candidates is the idealism to "do good," to "do the right thing," or to help make the campus better. Those are all laudable motivations, but that isn't your job. Getting elected to ASUN means getting elected to run, manage, and lead a government. It is a job with public weight. It means legal duties and obligations, and legal consequences if mistakes are made.

Too often students believe that ASUN is a popular place to be, a resume builder (the perpetual favorite), and really not that serious a thing. But ASUN is more than that. It is a proving ground for future elected leaders. It is a place to learn about functions of government, how governments work. It isn't a sandbox on some playground. So candidates, stop treating it like it is. You'll earn much more credibility if you do.

A little presumptuous?

Maybe it's just me, but it seems just a little bit presumptuous to start inviting people to the presidential debate you will hope to appear in before you've even won a spot in the general election.

The morality of a filing fee

I don't intend this to be a discussion of the legal standing of erecting a monetary barrier to running for an ASUN office.

I have one simple question, in which I ask the concession of one assumption. Assume a student has a desire to run for office but doesn't have the means to pay the $50 fee held against potential campaigning violations. What recourse is available to said student under official ASUN policy that would allow the student to run?

I am unaware of any official mechanism in place to afford such a student the opportunity to run.

As the title of this post implies, the moral implications are disturbing. Perhaps the system should be modified?

Senatorial Compensation Act is unconstitutional without student vote

In 2008, ASUN voters approved a ballot measure to grant to the Senate the authority to set senator compensation at a maximum of a $500 grant per semester in addition to the equivalent to the cost of 14 undergraduate credit hours per year (in 2008, that equated to almost $2,700 at the maximum). ASUN Public Law 75-42. See also Senate Report on the bill here. That question passed by the requisite majority. See election results certificate here. The Senate never acted on this authority.

Tonight the Senate considered a bill to implement the authority the voters granted back in 2008. There's just one problem: this might not be constitutional.

The ASUN Constitution states "The elected members of this government shall receive a compensation to be set by law. Any increase in compensation will take effect after the next intervening general election, which shall be subject to approval by a majority vote of the students voting in the election on that question." ASUN Const. article I, section 1(e). Broken into its component parts, in order:

1. Compensation set by law. The Senate passes a law.
2. Any increase cannot take effect until a general election intervenes. This means members of one Senate cannot raise its compensation knowing if they had been reelected. This is designed to limit corruption.
3. The voters must approve the law in the general election for it to take effect.

The problem is the law passed back in 2008 didn't actually set anything; it merely asked for authority for the Senate to do it later. This is a problem because nothing is set for the voters to pass judgment on. Furthermore, many years could pass between the time the authority was granted and the authority is acted upon, effectively depriving the voters of their review power.

Now, to be fair, the provision at issue in the Constitution is subject to several reasonable interpretations; indeed, at the time I supported the view the Senate is now acting on, that it is permissible to ask for the authority now and act on it later. But I now believe my reasoning then was flawed, and perhaps clouded by my proximity to the senatorial pay issue.

What if the Senate asked for the authority to set compensation at a maximum that, in its judgment, was reasonable? This is at the core of why what the Senate did in 2008 is not permissible. Nothing was set. The only difference in the two situations is in the one the Senate asked for authority bound by an upper cap and in the other there is no cap, but in neither case is anything set, fixed, determinate.

The phrase "set by law" as used in the Constitution implies a determinate figure, not some indeterminate permission to "set by law" the actual compensation in the future, so long as the voters agree. Should this bill pass, which is a poor judgment call after University President Glick told the senators tonight the University is facing budget cuts that will set the campus back at least a decade, it should be challenged in the Judicial Council and held invalid.

And we're so humble, too

You're welcome. In fact, were it not for our posts on this subject, CABNR would probably still have its single seat for another two decades. I might as well go ahead and state the obvious.

VLEG: Where the Nevada Sagebrush turns to for ASUN News.
VLEG: The ASUN Instruction Manual.

ASUN Veep Charlie Jose drops race before it begins?

Seriously? What's going on here? ASUN Vice President Charlie Jose filed for election for president, but his name no longer appears as a candidate. If Jose does not run, this practically ensures a win for Casey Stiteler, the Director of Programming.

---

UPDATE on Jan. 29. 2010 at 2:44 p.m.
Observation of the ASUN election Web site indicates Charlie Jose may have decided to reenter the race. His name once again appears as a candidate. The filing deadline is 5 p.m. today, so this may change once again, and even once the filing period closes, a candidate has some time to have his name removed from the ballot.

Judicial Council rebukes President, Senate

In a rare use of its constitutional power, the ASUN Judicial Council Wednesday unanimously ordered the Election Commission to implement a new apportionment scheme for Senate seats. In an unsigned order (meaning no single justice claims authorship), the Council found that both ASUN President Eli Reilly and the 22-member Senate failed to carry out their constitutional and legal responsibilities to apportion the seats in the Senate for the next two sessions.

According to population figures, the College of Agriculture, Biotechnology, and Natural Resources is entitled to a second seat, at the expense of one seat in the Division of Health Sciences. This shift is due to increased enrollment in CABNR degrees, primarily as a result of realignment of degree programs in the past year.

The ASUN Constitution requires the Senate to reapportion its seats every two years based on the number of students in each college and school. In 2008, the Senate passed a law delegating this function to the President, requiring him to transmit to the Senate by the first week of December every two years a statement showing the population in and the number of seats to which each college and school is entitled.

The Council found President Reilly failed to carry out his duty, noting that he does not dispute he failed to do his duty--indeed he readily admitted to the Council in writing of such failure. Further, since the deadline the Senate set has lapsed, the Council found that the Senate failed to accomplish its constitutional duty as well.

The Council's order indicates that it became independently aware of this situation. VLEG was the first to report on this issue. Neither the Senate nor President Reilly have commented on their failures.

The order directs the Election Commission to publish the new seat distribution in the Nevada Sagebrush and in election packets immediately. As of today, the numbers on the ASUN election web page are correct, but there is no indication it is because of the Council's action. Indeed, there is no record of the order on the ASUN Web site. The order was obtained only after VLEG requested the order directly from the Council.

There is no record of the Council ever exercising this power before Wednesday. This power existed under the previous ASUN Constitution, which voters revised in 2007.

Since filing for election to the Senate closes next week, the Judicial Council's order should have no effect on the election. Experts believe that the Council decided to act now rather than after the election so as to not prejudice any candidate's chances for election.

In Re Reapportionment Order 1-20-2010

Last week to file, most races empty or uncontested

As of 3 p.m. today, only one college will have a competetive Senate race in the upcoming ASUN Election on March 10-11. The Reynolds School of Journalism, which is entitled to one seat, has two candidates filing for candidacy. Info on who has filed is available here.

Worse, three colleges--Business (three seats), Education (two), and Science (two)--have no candidates filed at all. That's seven seats--or about one-third of the Senate--that will sit vacant come April, unless more candidates file by the deadline, Friday at 5 p.m. If that vacancy rate remains, the Senate must hold special elections to fill those vacancies.

There will be a primary for the presidency, as three candidates have filed. It remains to be seen if the decline in candidates is due to the $50 filing fee implemented last year or if it is because marketing efforts are failing. Last year 50 candidates ran for the 22-member Senate. So far, only 14 candidates have filed this year.

Sad.

BREAKING: Judicial Council to reapportion Senate

In an incredibly rare exercise of its constitutional power, the ASUN Judicial Council will issue an order to reapportion the Senate, due to the failure of both the ASUN President and Senate to satisfy their constitutional duties, sources close to the Council said this evening. We'll have the order once it's made available to us. We were the first to discuss this issue here.

UPDATE 1/21/2010: The ASUN Website appears to be offline, and we have not yet received a copy of the order. If this experience is any indication, I suppose I shouldn't expect to see the order for seven months or so.

Election season kicks off...with two fails?

The annual ASUN election cycle is a story of one debacle after another. In the past several years, elections have been mired in procedural and substantive errors, including questionable ballot counting practices, wholesale negligence with respect to following election rules, and officers who fail to perform their duties, but I have a feeling that this year will take the cake.

Already we have reported about two failed attempts of the Election Commission to meet this year, under the inspired leadership of a failed vice presidential candidate and former senator who was censured for Open Meeting Law violations, Jeremiah Todd. [UPDATE: A scheduled third meeting apparently happened, but a fourth meeting won't since the agenda never made it online. So the Commission has successfully held only 25 percent if its scheduled meetings this year.] Already we have reported on ASUN President Eli Reilly's failure to follow the law on Senate apportionment. Tonight we have proof.

This facebook page has surfaced stating the number of seats each college is entitled in the next Senate session. [UPDATE 1/20/2010: A more official source, the ASUN web site, contains the same info.] Notice anything wrong? CABNR gets screwed out of its new seat. According to the fall 2009 undergraduate headcount figures, CABNR is entitled to a second seat at the expense of one of the Division of Health Sciences seat (see our analysis here).

Unfortunately, since President Reilly never bothered to run the numbers and transmit them to the Senate, we're operating under an erroneous apportionment scheme. It's pretty sad considering we did all the hard work (30 minutes worth, tops) and even gave an example of what an appropriate statement looks like in our post here. Practically all that was required was to fill in the blanks.

Perhaps the Judicial Council will exercise its constitutional power under Article IV, section 2(d) to take over the apportionment process. [UPDATE 1/19/2010: We have received credible information that the Judicial Council is in fact examining whether to exercise its constitutional power and duty in this matter.]

Candidate packet misreports the law
The election packet misreports the Election Code. It does not include the amendments that were made to the code in the 76th Session that were scheduled to take effect in this election. Don't forget that the legal status of those amendments, among most everything else that came out of the 76th Session, was seriously in question, but was never resolved. (Hint hint to some enterprising candidate. Filed documents available here. Second hint: the issues in the cases are still viable.)

If anything, since record keeping is so abysmally poor from the 76th Session forward, good luck trying to determine what is law and what is not. Heck, even the government won't publish an accurate, up-to-date compilation of the Election Code (that link is now two elections old and no active links point to it--it took a Google search to unearth it).

And don't even get me started on the constitutional amendment that the voters ratified but still hasn't been included in the document.

Any bets on whether the Sagebrush has picked up on any of this. Or maybe they've made it policy to ignore ASUN entirely.

So if the goal is to out-do (in a bad way) past elections, this election is off to a commendable start.

Peace and love.

Apportion what?

The ASUN Constitution, in article I, section 1(b), requires the Senate to apportion its seats every two years according to number of students in each college or school. The 75th Senate enacted a law to largely remove itself from the apportionment process. ASUN Public Law 75-28. That law provides that the ASUN President is to transmit a statement of the apportionment and of the Senate for the next two years. This is to be done by the first day of December or one week thereafter. To my knowledge, this has not been done. (For an example of what such a statement looks like at the federal level, see this. By the way, ASUN's apportionment law is modeled after the federal House of Representatives apportionment law.)

Some senators, at a recent Government Operations Committee meeting, while discussing Sen. Sean Hostmeyer's efforts to create revised statutes for ASUN, expressed concern over the President having control of apportionment. (Surprisingly, it sounded like it was the first time they had read that provision, given their tone, but that's another story.) That's a farce, because the ASUN President really doesn't have control over anything. The numbers are the numbers, and the equal proportion method dictates how many seats each college gets.

Under my quick count, using the fall headcount numbers (my math here), CABNR will get its long-awaited second seat at the expense of a Health Sciences seat. One little note that could use some senatorial attention is how, if at all, to count the 160 interdisciplinary students, University Studies Abroad Consortium students and bachelor of science neuroscience students. Typically, they are lumped in with Liberal Arts, since all undeclared majors are counted there. Where they get counted shouldn't matter, as they probably wouldn't get counted in a college where 160 could change apportionment.

Another thing that should be looked into is the basis for the headcount numbers. In the 75th Session, the University's method of counting as the basis for ASUN's apportionment caused some controversy. See section 5 of the ASUN law and this report, particularly my dissenting view. Basically, the University's system was claimed to be incapable of counting a single student more than once, as in the case of multiple majors or degrees. This could substantially throw off the apportionment, as is demonstrated in my dissent when using student credit hours as the basis of the apportionment. Just wanted to share my knowledge.

Two for two

The Commission on Association Elections, under the dazzling leadership of censured former Sen. Jeremiah Todd, is two for two this year--that's two for two in canceled meetings. Sure have been a lot of canceled meetings in ASUN this term. At least he hasn't violated the Open Meeting Law, the basis for his censure as a senator.

It's not a [g]reek conspiracy

In response to our friends and fellow bloggers over at UNR For Liberty, I thought I'd respond to this post about how it is the campus's social elites and special interests who control the ASUN Senate. Those elites and special interests? The Greek community. My response in a nutshell: so what?

To me it seems natural that a constituency that votes in higher numbers than the rest of the population (I don't have hard data readily available) would elect more people to the Senate. Wait, I do have data. In 2006, a survey was conducted to determine who votes and what determines whether they do (link). I'll round to 1,000 for simplicity of calculation. 1,000 students voted in that election, out of an undergraduate population of 12,000 (again, rounded). So like 8 percent of the eligible voting population voted. Of those who did vote, nearly 30 percent were self-identified as Greek members. Using John Russell's figure of how large Greek life is on this campus (7 percent), and assuming the proportion was the same in 2006 as it is now, then it's pretty apparent that Greeks outvote non-Greeks by more than three times their actual proportion.

Now, Russell is right that the Senate is composed of a disproportionate number of Greeks, but is that really a problem? What was the proportion of Greeks to non-Greeks who were in the election? I'd be willing to bet a similar proportion exists in both the Senate and in the candidate pool at election time. If more Greeks run, isn't it natural that more will get elected?

Russell's data also indicates the strength of a voting block. Greeks vote for other Greeks. Hardly a news flash there. While they aren't large enough in numbers to fix the outcome of an election, they certainly will have a measurable sway on the result. UNR START? Nice idea, but it didn't work out as a voting block. Why that's the case is anyone's guess. Could've been a message that didn't resonate with enough people, ineffective campaigning, lack of numbers. Whatever it was, the idea of an organized political party in ASUN was fascinating, and in fact anticipated among those who drafted the new constitution and election code. Common platforms are nice because they let people easily distinguish many disparate candidates. But back to the subject at hand.

All of this indicates that Greeks are more involved in campus affairs than your average, non-Greek undergrad. Big whoop. Same is probably true for those who live on campus versus off campus (I didn't examine the data for that correlation, but it's all right there). There's probably the same kind of correlation when looking at club members, too. Now, true, it is a problem that more non-Greeks aren't running and getting elected, but that reflects on ASUN's outreach efforts and the interests of less connected students to become involved, not on the Greek community. Can you really fault them for being more civicly minded and connnected to their campus than most other students? I wasn't Greek and I managed to get elected and re-elected. Being Greek definitely helps, but it's not the be all and end all to getting elected. Campaigning and getting your name out there more than anything else is what matters.

This would be a story if the senators disproportionately disbursed money to Greeks because of their Greek affiliations, but I suspect John Russell and his peers would have a hard time trying to prove that. To me, the Greek issue is a non-issue. Besides, where would this argument be if START had been successful in electing 10 people to the Senate, a near majority in that body? Sounds like an awful powerful voting block to me.

Certi-FAIL-ication

Today the Election Commission released on the ASUN website the unofficial results of the 2009 ASUN elections. It's interesting because it doesn't appear to be a certification of anything.

Compare to last year's document, this year's "certification" appears to be desperately lacking necessary elements. (Hint: It's supposed to be the same thing.)

The relevant language in the Election Code (section 18(a)(4)-(5) states:

(4) After the preliminary tabulation, the results of the elections shall be released by the Commission Chair and the Attorney General of the ASUN as soon as possible. The results shall be posted on the ground floor of the Joe Crowley Student Union as well as in other relevant places so that all persons shall have access to these results. They shall be clearly marked as preliminary and uncertified results.

(5) The election results for all elected officials positions, as certified by the Commission, shall become effective by their being read into the Minutes of a Senate meeting.

Given what was done last year under the same code, and the fact that the form of the certification was never challenged itself, there would appear to be no reason for current Commission Chair Sean Driscoll to change the form used. It was clear, contained all the essential elements required for a valid certification, and it declared the winners in clear language. This year, not so much.

As it stands, all that has been released is a spreadsheet showing votes. It is not a certification of results, unofficial or otherwise, effective or not.

Believe it or not, it looks like we may have found the one thing Nicole Nelson did right last year. (I've got $5 that says she isn't the one who drafted that document; she just signed it.)

Until the Commission releases a sufficient unofficial certification (results become official only once read into the record at a Senate meeting, by the Election Code's own terms), the Senate should refuse to have anything entered into its records. It's not like this is rocket science, people: just copy what was done last year, correcting the proper names, dates, and vote totals.

---

UPDATE: March 25 at 8 p.m.

Last night we learned that an official document will be coming forward from the Commission for next week's Senate meeting (link at 6:18). Perhaps it will be a certification in the proper form.

Reilly/Perez

Either the Reilly/Perez is taking a really early stab at 2010, or else they still have a campaign sign up on campus in the engineering quad. Now interestingly, this isn't against any sort of ASUN elections code. But it seems to be in poor taste to leave your garbage sitting on the lawn long after the main event finished.

So, Reilly/Perez, pretty please with sugar on top: get your signs off my lawn.

Another BoR meeting, constitutional amendment still pending

The Board of Regents April 2009 meeting will have one agenda item noticeably missing: the ASUN constitutional amendment from 2008 that is still pending. More than one year after it was ratified by the students, it still has not climbed the administrative ladder from student passage to Board of Regents approval. We have previously discussed this issue here and here.

In an effort to move this along a little more quickly, as the Senate might find great use in the contents of the amendment in the near future, below is a specimen certificate that Sean Driscoll can use to certify the amendment to UNR President Glick so that it might appear on the Regents' next agenda (June), more than one full year after it happened.

Specimen Certificate to UNR President on ASUN Constitutional Amendment, 2008

Publish at Scribd or explore others: asun

We should also note that this issue was raised directly to Sean Driscoll, the Chair of the Election Commission. In fact, we transmitted to him a copy of the specimen certificate above. It would appear that he has not acted on our (humbly) well-researched--dare we say accurate and competent--advice.

Could you guys maybe get on this? It is the Constitution and all, so it is kinda important. Sort of. Yeah.

Now that the elections are over

Although the 2009 ASUN election season is over, there is still one more race to cover: Speaker of the Senate.

The newly elected senators will elect a leader from among themselves at their first meeting, on April 15. In the coming days, we will look at the speaker race and give our views.

With that election complete, our focus on this blog will shift (well, not really since we haven't posted exclusively about elections) to the "other matters of importance" part in our tagline.

We look forward to providing insight and analysis like no other publication on campus does. We also hope the 77th Session of the Senate will be less deserving of our ire, but unless the current "Speaker," Priscilla Acosta, reaches out to provide competent training for the newbies, we fear it will be a rerun of a really bad year. (Just to be clear, the incumbent senators are not qualified in this respect.)