Was it all a dream? Did the 2004 election really happen?
Could be the opening to Michael Moore's next blockbuster. Could also be an appropriate question for the Brown student body to ask itself about last spring's Undergraduate Council of Students elections. If it was a dream, it was the kind of dream where we wake up knowing that something confusing and unsettling happened, but damned if we knew what it was all about.
Of course, more important questions to ask might be: Why should anyone care about what happened last spring? Aren't there more important topics to be thinking about than some silly student elections at our frou-frou college? Isn't this space reserved for oral sex tips and discussion of what brand of oil John Ashcroft uses to anoint himself? (Crisco.)
The answers to these questions are, respectively: (1) Because UCS has oversight of hundreds of thousands of our dollars, theoretically represents the student body and can possibly enact very positive change at Brown; (2) Perhaps, but not many; (3) I also hear that Richard Perle soaks in a bathtub full of Aunt Jemima every morning.
It is doubtful that anyone fully understands what happened in last spring's election for UCS president - not the voters, not the candidates and certainly not the people who were running it.
After then-President Rahim Kurji '05 announced his retirement from the fast-paced world of student government so he could spend more time with his family, a field of four candidates cast their hats into the ring and boldly set out to wedge themselves into political stereotypes. We had Herald opinions columnist Ari Savitzky '06, the wild-eyed gladhander; Sonia Gupta '06, the smooth-talking optimist; Joel Payne '05, the mellow moderate; and Brian Bidadi '06, the fringe candidate with a cult following.
These four horsemen galloped across campus with buttons and Web sites, begging for signatures and votes. An active and engaged electorate turned out in force for the much-anticipated candidates' debate, swelling the Barus and Holley venue past its official capacity of 12 people.
Election night came and at midnight on an unseasonably cold May night, a small crowd of candidates and supporters waited for the results on the steps of Faunce. And waited. And waited.
At 3 a.m., were told by an Elections Committee reeking of booze and cheap perfume that there was some sort of tie and everyone was going to have to vote again. As it turns out, UCS uses run-off voting, a fun method of democracy rejected by every state in the United States except for Louisiana, which is not well known for its lack of corruption. Although nobody would confirm it, it seems that Savitzky landed 46 percent of the vote, Payne and Gupta came in with 25 percent each and Bidadi scooped up the rest. Savitzky was, of course, proclaimed the winner.
Just kidding. This being the Brown Bayou, we had another election, this time featuring just Savitzky and Payne, who had edged Gupta by only 11 votes. Another frenzy of electioneering ensued, along with the appropriate scandals that nobody could explain. Forty-eight hours later, our nightmare was over; we had a president. Payne had edged Savitzky, 54 percent to 46 percent. Of course, nobody realized it, because The Herald had stopped printing for the semester, leaving the Daily Jolt as the campus's only source of news and sophisticated polling about our favorite holiday (Boxing Day). The consensus on the Jolt was that Payne had been elected, but only because Savitzky was in jail for aggravated assault.
The most tempting analogy for our convoluted UCS election is the presidential election in 2000. Savitzky is Gore, Payne is Bush, Bidadi is Nader, the Elections Committee is the Supreme Court, Will Smith is Ali, etc. But this is too simple.
The real analogy is with the 2004 Democratic primaries. Savitzky is Howard Dean, the early favorite who came up short at the critical moment and saw it all slip away. Payne is John Kerry, who edged out the competition at that critical moment and got the backing of a coalition of voters determined to stop the other guy. Bidadi, of course, is Dennis Kucinich, and Gupta is ... let's say Gupta is Dick Gephardt. The point is that Payne caught the wave that was turning away from the frontrunner and rode it to victory.
What does this mean for the Joel Payne presidency? After all, he was the first choice of only a quarter of the electorate. Furthermore, a difference of just six votes would have put him out of the race and possibly put Gupta into power. Will he forever be perceived as illegitimate? No. Both Payne and John Kerry won legitimately in real elections. It's not Payne's fault that the UCS constitution is moronic, and a clear majority of voters preferred him over Savitzky.
The 2004 election, however, still cast a cloud of confusion over UCS, adding to the clouds of uncertainty that already hovered there, casting raindrops of lost opportunity onto the plain of irrelevance.
The fact is that UCS could be the impetus behind a surge in student empowerment, but as long as it is perceived as a pathetic pasture for former high school treasurers, it won't get anything done.
The good news is that Joel Payne, by all accounts, is a swell guy who can bring people together to get things done. We shouldn't hold our breaths waiting for some bold initiatives from him, but I hope he can create the right environment for those ideas to get traction a take off. Perhaps the first item on his agenda should be an overhaul of the UCS elections procedure. A clarified online voting protocol would be in order, as well as the elimination of run-off voting.
Also, all Brown students should be forced to pay close attention to campus politics, under penalty of death for non-compliance.
Now that would be government in action.
Ethan Ris '05 is a history concentrator.
