It’s that time of year again.
With just about a month of their undergraduate careers under their belts, Penn’s freshmen have plastered the campus with posters, filled the dining halls with table tents and slipped flyers under every door in the Quadrangle and Hill House in an effort to be elected to one of the eight coveted first-year spots on the Undergraduate Assembly, or to an all-important leadership spot on the class board.
As they campaign to become Penn’s next student leaders, one might expect some measure of decorum and seriousness.
But any member of the Class of 2006 who thinks that the popularity contests that defined high school for many are a thing of the past are in for a rude awakening.
Historically, elections for student government have been defined by attempts at wit, low-brow humor and sexual innuendo. There is no debate, no real exchange of ideas or expositions on student government. In their place are inane poems and the like.
Perhaps it is too much to expect such green candidates to have much to say about the state of undergraduate life at Penn, but it is not likely that a student will take student government seriously if he doesn’t take the election seriously.
Bad candidates — those who make a joke of the process — are playing to your lesser instincts. They are counting on you to be swayed to their name by some stupid candidate trick.
But if student government is to be effective, and if it is to gain and maintain the respect of both the students it represents and the administration it must work with, it needs to be composed of serious, dedicated leaders who care about improving student life at Penn.
It is those students who deserve a vote.
