UA votes to remove 'gag rule'

The rule had banned Undergraduate Assembly candidates from speaking to campus organizations before elections. The Undergraduate Assembly voted Sunday night to eliminate the section of the Nominations and Elections Committee's Fair Practices Code prohibiting candidates from being quoted or featured in publications -- like The Daily Pennsylvanian -- before the election. The section of the code, known as the "gag rule," disqualified candidates in past elections who were quoted in campus publications, including UA Treasurer Steve Schorr in fall 1994. Candidates may now be quoted freely in any campus media organ, from UTV-13 to the DP. But Schorr said eliminating the gag rule will only have limited effects. "The DP could play favorites already," he said. "It's not like the DP is going to write articles about [a candidate]." NEC Chairman and Engineering junior Ben Goldberger said the code provided incumbents with an unfair advantage because they already had access to "schmoozing with [the DP]." "Every candidate can now start on equal footing," Goldberger said. UA Vice Chairperson and College junior Larry Kamin had offered a more moderate alternative to entirely eliminating the code -- saying its removal "would make the DP all-powerful" -- but did voice his support for the original plan. "Everyone listens to the DP, and everyone listens to the DP because the DP has demand," he said. "Sunlight is the best disinfectant. The best way to make students as accessible as possible is directly or through media sources." College freshman Meghan Butler said eliminating the code will provide candidates with more "equal opportunities." "Everyone has the chance to contact the DP and get their ideas out there," she said. The publicity restrictions -- originally removed in the early 1980s -- were again incorporated into the Fair Practices Code because UA members petitioned the NEC for their re-application after only one election. But Goldberger said changes in the University climate have led the NEC to try to remove the code again. He added that he foresees fewer problems than those that occurred in the 1980s, but said that the removal is only on a trial basis. "The NEC will reevaluate the restriction removal in two years, allowing us to assess its need," he said. But some current UA members offered criticism of the proposal. The vote ended in a 13-6 decision, demonstrating that almost one-third of UA members opposed the code's elimination. "I see it as necessary to run the elections fairly," said College freshman Matthew Chait, who voted against the code cut. "Students are going to struggle to get their names in the paper, and [DP reporters] will have many new friends," he added. College junior Michael Steib said the removal of the restrictions would give advantages to candidates who knew DP reporters. "I couldn't vote to help my own cause," he said. "Before [the codes] hassled those who were running, but they made the elections fair." And Engineering junior Chris Hyzer said the elections "will be more of a popularity contest -- if you can imagine that." "From my experience, candidates who are elected from sheer popularity turn out to be less effective members," Hyzer added. But UA Chairperson and College junior Tal Golomb reiterated that the removal, for now, is "only on a trial basis. We want to see if it improves elections."