A lower than usual voter turn out for the Student Government elections held last month has recently come to light.
When the polls closed, only a grand total of 4,056 students had voted. Andy Walsh won his presidential campaign with 2,160 votes. Caroline Yopp came in second and Jonathon Smith came in third.
Those who voted in the elections did so because they were very much aware of the impact Student Government makes on campus and wanted to be a part of that process.
”Whether it is setting up events or giving out free stuff in the Brickyard, [Student Government] has definitely made a noticeable impact on my college experience,” Alex Mull, freshman in business administration, said.
Mull worries many students on campus don’t appreciate, or even know what their Student Government does for them.
“They could send out a report of what they accomplished and how it affects the students, much like the president of the United States gives a State of the Union address,” Mull said. In fact, there is such a report. Former Student Body President Chandler Thompson released a “Year in Review” through her final email “Howl” update.
“[I voted because] it was part of the Big Three,” Erin Hunter, a sophomore in management, said. “I think the Student Government plays a major role [on campus] and we need to elect student leaders who will represent us well.”
The Big Three on campus consists of the Student Government, the Inter-Residence Council and the Union Activities Board, all of which cater to student wants and needs.
There are different initiatives on campus trying to encourage students to vote, including a page in The Brick, asking students to list who they voted for. Hunter admits she was very excited to fill out the page.
Andy Walsh, the newly-elected student body president, attributes the small voter turnout to the small number of candidates.
“Two things strike me,” Walsh said. “[The small voter turnout] was not a result of the candidates being less likeable, and voter turnout is not indicative of how much effort a candidate put [into their campaign].”
This year only three candidates ran for student body president, while there were many more last year. Walsh asserts the more candidates you have, the more people will come in.
“There was no difference in how hard the candidates ran this year,” Walsh said. “We tried to reach as many students as possible.”
Some, like Mull, appreciated and were inspired by the leadership they saw on campus.
“I saw the impact that Chandler [Thompson] made and by that, the importance of the position, so I decided that I wanted an equally-effective Student Government president to serve me next year,” Mull said.
Daniel Miller, a freshman in chemical engineering, had no intentions of voting until Smith came to a hall council meeting in Miller’s dorm, Turlington . He attributes the low voter turnout to the candidates, not the students.
“I think most of the candidates failed to reach the student body,” Miller said. “…Those signs saying [candidates’] names and the position they’re running for aren’t very effective.”
Miller suggests future candidates hand out flyers letting the student body know about their running platform and goals.
More debates were held this year for candidates, which Walsh claims has its positive and negative sides.
“They’re tricky. They’re a great opportunity to talk about your platform, but you limit yourself from reaching out directly as a candidate,” Walsh said.
Miller has doubts about the voter turnout increasing in future years.
“I think most other students generally don’t care about the Student Government or the elections unless they know one of the candidates personally,” Miller said.