I try not to write columns about Student Life that actually appear in Student Life because it just seems weird and unprofessional. But, there are times when what we publish has been shown to influence the student body. In the past, one of those times has been in the Student Union elections. At Student Life, we have a practice of endorsing Student Union candidates and writing an editorial that explains our endorsements. Larger newspaper regularly give endorsements to political candidates and Student Life also provided endorsements for the midterm elections. It’s good practice for our newspaper to do endorsements and maybe even for Student Union candidates who will similarly fight for newspaper endorsements if they go on to a career in government.

But, there are differences between endorsements given by the St. Louis Post-Dispatch and those given by Student Life. The Post-Dispatch operates within a larger metropolis, which means when the Post-Dispatch gives a senate endorsement it does so as one newspaper of several newspapers giving endorsements to candidates who are also being discussed in other segments of society. Talk-show hosts discuss candidates for Senate, as do church leaders and a variety of special interest groups. We almost read too much about these candidates and by election time we know them well enough that any specific endorsement does not make or break a candidate’s chances.

At Wash. U., however, we do not have the same political climate surrounding SU elections (you know, it’s not like you can form an exploratory committee for SU president while you’re still in high school). And with very limited time to campaign and only a few methods of campaigning that work, Student Life’s analysis of candidates in its endorsements and news coverage of their positions is one of only a few venues for campaigning that reaches a large portion of the student body. Grabbing Student Life is easy, and we carry a sudoku puzzle that is often times more interesting than a 9 a.m. lecture. But the easiness of just listening to what we have to say about elections is dangerous.

The choices that we have for SU this year are very different and the differences are important in ways that will significantly affect how this campus is going to develop or not develop over the next few years. While we have candidate statements in this paper and the editorial board has done its best to talk to all the candidates thoroughly and render a judgment of which candidates we think would be the best for the needs of this campus as we understand them, we’re a very limited faction of Wash. U. As an editorial board, we’re not necessarily representative of this campus. We have specific issues that we’re more passionate about than others, and based on the feedback we get from students about our opinions on campus issues, we don’t necessarily have the same vision for this school that everyone else does.

In the past, there has been a high correlation between candidates Student Life endorses and the candidates who have been elected. And while we have sat down with all the candidates and tried to conclude who we think will do the best job, our values aren’t necessarily representative. So, don’t just look at these candidates through the perspective we’ve offered, but go ahead and look at the Web sites and statements for candidates on both of the slates. SU really does have a huge impact on our school and it’s worth making sure we all pick the candidates who represent our own beliefs.

Jill is a sophomore in Arts & Sciences and a Forum editor. She can be reached via e-mail at forum@studlife.com.

 Print This Post

This entry was posted on Wednesday, April 4th, 2007 at 12:00 pm and is filed under Forum. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.