So are you going to vote in the SAC election? Because you really should. Really, we mean it.
The Varsity may have run stories in the past questioning SAC’s relevance, it’s true, but the only way to make SAC more relevant is to get out and participate in the elections.
Of course, not all elections run smoothly, as evidenced by two stories on today’s front page.
Great pains must be taken by all involved to ensure fairness, and the slightest mistake can call the whole process into question. The ASSU’s recent charges that a memo from the director of the Academic Bridging Program to instructors constituted an endorsement of a student candidate in the Governing Council elections is one example.
The loss of Internet service at the Chestnut Residence is another-possibly a more serious one, since both GC and SAC elections use a web-based voting system, via the ROSI service that students also use to choose their courses and programs.
Using ROSI seems like a logical and efficient way to do things: Students are already used to the system, they can vote from home, results can be easily tabulated, and the system already has security in place that should discourage tampering or multiple voting.
On March 28 of last year, The Varsity ran a story about Elan Ohayon’s difficulties with the new system. As a GC candidate, he didn’t trust the web-based voting system, and ran into problems when he wanted a paper ballot counted in the election.
His difficulties brought up all kinds of questions about the system-the fear that students might be excluded due to lack of computer access or literacy. Of course, since everybody is supposed to already know ROSI simply by being a student, this theoretically shouldn’t be a problem.
But what happens when one residence-particularly an off-campus one like Chestnut-loses Internet access? Well, Chestnut residents who want to vote can just as easily do so by logging on at a library or some other computing facility on campus.
It’s really only a matter of convenience-but the whole point of web-based voting was to make it convenient for everybody. Now the fairness of the election is called into question because the system is convenient for some, but not for others. Responsibility to our community really shouldn’t depend on how easy it is, but the practical truth is that many students simply won’t vote if it means moving too much.
But the question of Internet voting isn’t restricted to U of T. We’re pioneering a new kind of democracy. It’s probably only a matter of time before provinces, states, and countries begin using Internet-based election systems-and if we have to worry that whole segments of the population will be excluded from the electoral process because they don’t have computers or because their ISP died, democracy itself will be in serious trouble.
Then again, if such problems could be ironed out, maybe democracy would actually improve-quick and easy elections (and referenda) would leave little excuse for politicians going back on their promises or ignoring their constituents.
In the meantime, let’s hope U of T and SAC can find a creative and effective way to handle this problem. But you know, there will probably always be something reassuring about marking an X on a real ballot and stuffing it in a box.
