Progressive At Cal
Friday, April 11, 2003
Take that, Kevin Sabet
Interesting op-ed on one aspect of the drug war.
Barely related but more fun: It's interesting that a former Student Action/BECS/Unite signatory wants to crush the "evil" users of medical marijuana. "Preventing cancer patients from receiving treatment" DONE
|
Thursday, April 10, 2003
Election Nightmare
The Daily Cal's account:
The ASUC postponed elections until Monday after the second day of mishaps at the polls.
ASUC members spent hours deliberating whether to postpone elections for two weeks or continue the second day of voting today.
Joe Henchman asked me to provide his account:
I am writing this because I am sure that Thursday will be filled with curses and screaming about the actions taken by the ASUC Wednesday night. As a participant in those actions, and as someone who shares the concerns of ordinary students and candidates alike, I hope to clarify what the situation is.
The meeting last night was to find a way to rescue the election. I don't think I need to go into the details of the problems the election has been facing, but they are numerous. Essentially, closed polls, long lines, illegal online votes/firewall problems, and a pollworker shortage. Officially, the meeting was a hearing of the Judicial Council, and was under their auspices.
I was asked to attend the meeting, to represent the interests of independents and minor party candidates, of whom I gathered the input of about a dozen. I also was invited due to my knowledge of past elections, and because I have been assisting the ASUC Attorney General. Also at the meeting were members of the Judicial Council, Elections Council, representatives of the Student Action, CalSERVE, Squelch!, DAAP, and APPLE parties, the Daily Cal, most of the Senate, and other interested people.
The meeting lasted 7 hours, and the focus was essentially to determine what we do now. After much discussion, it was determined that if voting continued on Thursday, it would resemble Wednesday in terms of problems. The Elections Council chair has been awake for 55 hours, there was a massive shortage of pollworkers, everything that could go wrong did go wrong, and there was no confidence that these issues could be fixed by Thursday or even Friday. Proposals discussed were, in order of severity, 1) voiding the election and holding a new one in 2 weeks, 2) moving immediately to online voting, and 3) suspending voting for a few days to allow a time to regroup and then continue the election next week. Continuing the election on Thursday and Friday simply would have been more of the same problems that we have had this week thus far. After more discussion, option 3 was the one adopted.
Monday, Tuesday, and Wednesday there will be voting at all locations and with sufficient computers to avoid lines. All votes cast thus far will be included in the tally. All campaign violations will carry over, as this is a continuation of the existing election, not a new election.
This decision makes no one happy. But this situation needed a remedy, and it is unfortunate that this was the only option open. Three more days of voting next week is awful, but it was the least awful option. If it were all possible, we would have sucked up and gone ahead Thursday and Friday. However, that's what we did Tuesday and Wednesday, and it's been a fiasco.
The Judicial Council has taken charge of creating a blueprint for managing the election, and many micromanaging details have been worked out to ensure absolutely positively that the mistakes of the past two days will not reappear next week. Funds have been committed by the ASUC Auxiliary to carry out a fair, legitimate election.
There was also a concern that whatever action taken by this group could be overturned by anyone who files a lawsuit, or by the President issuing an executive order (the Daily Cal erroneously states that the President can overturn any actions taken by the Judicial Council). I believe we remedied these issues; any lawsuits to invalidate the election based on the last two days will have a much higher standard to be accepted. The Judicial Council has the authority to override any executive order that conflicts with their ruling tonight, and has pledged to exercise their power to do so (since they don't want to have this hearing process be a waste). Suffice it to say that MTW voting is what is going to happen, and any attempt to overturn it will have a tough time, because any remedy that could be suggested has already been considered.
It has been a difficult week for many people. I just felt I had to provide a fuller story to answer the questions that will likely be asked, or screamed, Thursday.
Yours,
Joseph Henchman
|
Tuesday, April 08, 2003
Monday, April 07, 2003
Q: Is Hugo Grotius on the Editorial Staff of the Daily Cal???
A: No, CalSERVE candidates are just that good. They have the most experience, abilities, and vision.
Daily Cal Endorsements
|
Sunday, April 06, 2003
Daily Cal Endorsement Predictions: Student Advocate
Bryant Yang. Now, this may sound like a given to everyone, but there are significant reasons that the Daily Cal will endorse Yang in addition to this being an uncontested race. I predict that a graduating senior Squelch! member will not get the endorsement -- yes, even if three senators did vote last year to rename the senate chambers after him ;-). (That's including himself.)
The most important reason that Yang will be endorsed (over "No Endorsement") is this: the Daily Cal will want to "balance out" the endorsements and give one to Student Action and APPLE. This will be the only endorsement either of these parties receives.
|
Saturday, April 05, 2003
Quick Daily Cal Elections Forum Recap
more on this in the days to come
My predictions so far definitely stand. Senators Gomez and Primm were great speakers who presented themselves quite well and answered questions will skill, demonstrating their qualifications. Frankenstein and Lee were poor speakers who gave weak answers to the questions posed.
One highlight include the question asked of both Frankenstein and Lee that went something like this "You're party has been in office the last four years and every single candidate from your party has promised to do exactly what you promised today. Aren't you going to fail/lie too?" Lee responded with something like: "Han Hong has provided the framework for the Student Union" ??? And Frankenstein completely ducked the issue of "Unity" by answering something unrelated. Both came off very poorly.
On an unrelated note, Deenihan was definitely the best of the Squelch! candidates. Duman did a better job of answering the questions (saying "I am not answering your question") then Frankenstein. Also, Duman made fun of the very poor written article on the Presidental candidates. Friedman made a mockery of the candidates running against Joshi.
|
Friday, April 04, 2003
For the Record
While it is technically correct to say that Senator Primm lost "by less than 200 votes," it's misleading. The final vote was 3027 to 2947, or exactly 80 votes.
How can you say that "he has written few bills" and later admit that he has written bills that "funded several student group activities?"
Also, no mention is made of the huge success of the Relay for Life that Senator Primm organized, just that he gave it money.
From what I have heard, Senator Primm's voice is quite "pronounced" in the Senate.
|
Thursday, April 03, 2003
Daily Cal Endorsement Predictions: Executive Vice President
Taina Gomez. This one is a close call between Senators Taina Gomez and Paul LaFata.
The Daily Cal will not endorse Frank Lee. Anyone reading the Daily Cal article on the EVP candidates will clearly see that. The article reads like a laundry list of reasons why Frank will not get the endorsement. It states that Lee rehashes the unfulfilled campaign promises of his Student Action predecessors. His experience is limited, and worse, it includes running the horrendous failure that was the One Campus Initiative. However, “Lee insists that the One Campus Campaign is not dead, saying many events follow the ideology.” This begs the question, what follows it? Can anyone point to a single success of One Campus? Obviously not. For these reasons, Lee will not be endorsed by the Daily Cal.
The Daily Cal will also not endorse Paul LaFata, but this will be a tough choice. The Daily Cal has recently been under siege from the extreme right-wing on the campus for being too “leftist,” of all things. (This is as though a paper that consistently supports moderate candidates (e.g. Dean) and conservative propositions (e.g. 209 and CRENO) while running full page ads from David Horowitz and the Ayn Rand Foundation could reasonably be labeled as “leftist.” The more likely reason for the recent onslaught of attacks against the Daily Cal is the inability of incredibly mediocre writers and editors, who happened by chance to be conservative, to rise up in the Daily Cal. On a related tangent, one of those mediocre former staffers, Steve Sexton, wrote much of the Daily Cal’s endorsements last year. This year’s will surely be all the more civil and professional due to his absence.) Due to the extreme right-wing pressure, the Daily Cal may feel that it needs to prove that it too can be “fair and balanced” (gag) by endorsing the lone open Republican. After a large internal struggle, the Daily Cal will choose not to give in to this unreasonable pressure. Now, this is not to say that LaFata lacks positives. As his campaigners state, he is certainly extremely respectful of other senators and at times prudent with money. (For this reason, I will personally put LaFata as my third choice, after Senator Gomez and Kevin Deenihan).
In the end, the Daily Cal will not endorse LaFata because his two main advantages, professionalism and prudence, are shared by his opponent, Senator Gomez. She is, by all accounts, just as respectful of the others senators, just as professional in her conduct, and just as, if not more, prudent with the ASUC funds. While Senator Gomez’s style of “professionalism” differs from Lafata’s, her calming methods will be viewed by the Daily Cal as potentially much better suited towards a professional senate then Lafata’s often active professionalism. More importantly, she brings a true vision to the table. The Daily Cal will realize that Senator Gomez’s conduct over the past year indicates that her term as Executive Vice President will be marked by increased senate accountability and accessibility.
|
Wednesday, April 02, 2003
Daily Cal Endorsement Predictions: President
President: Kris Primm. The biggest factor that will cause the Daily Cal will choose to endorse ASUC Senator Primm is his competitor, Daniel Frankenstein. Last year, Frankenstein’s slogan was “Let Him be Your Monster.” This year, Frankenstein’s slogan is “He’s No Monster.” This sad farce of a campaign speaks to the two major problems with Frankenstein: he’s inconsistent and a disgrace to Cal students.
Let’s discuss how Frankenstein is inconsistent. Well, obviously, the slogans show that he can not choose whether or not he is a monster or not. (I personally believe the former is likely the truth). But, all joking aside, Frankenstein has no principles. He values not ideals but expediency. After being elected as a senator with the APPLE party, he made a large hubbub about how this was the beginning of the end for the machine, Student Action. After spewing tirades for months against Student Action, Frankenstein allied himself with that party after it was clear to him that APPLE would not lead him to dizzying heights within the ASUC. (Of course, the question remains whether or not APPLE would have become the farce it is now had Frankenstein not stabbed it in the back. It’s sadly funny, in a twisted sort of way, that APPLE has finally backed Daniel after he was the vehicle of its destruction.) Thus, Frankenstein, who had already broken his pledge not to run again (as he would be abroad in Israel, he told us), broken his pledge to his party by abandoning it for the value-vacuum machine that is Student Action. In any case, this is only one example of Frankenstein having chosen expediency over ideals. He spoke about housing issues, but voted against lobbying for more housing. He spoke about improving transportation, but voted against CarShare. He said he would REPRESENT students, but abstained often, even after both Republican James Gallagher and progressive Jessica Quindel pleaded with him not to. The list goes on and on.
Furthermore, Frankenstein is a discredit to Cal students. Following the glorious example of “Jesse’s Girls,” Frankenstein has stooped to the lowest level possible. His campaign, consistent with his politics, is based wholly on gimmicks and lacks all substance. You aren’t a monster, Frankenstein? Then why are your campaign-monkeys dressed as the Frankenstein Monster? Why have you chosen to slate yourself with an enormous Tasmanian Devil? Juvenile questions for a juvenile campaign. As students at UC Berkeley, we should have the sophistication to vote for students based on the merits of the campaign, not cheap gimmicks. The squelch candidate is more serious than you, Frankenstein. What is the reason that Frankenstein has stooped to the level of junior high school students? It simply this: he stands for nothing more than the perpetuation of the spoils system, ASUC corruption, and the status quo.
Senator Primm is all that Frankenstein is not. Senator Primm has values and for this reason he has aligned with the Progressively-valued CalSERVE. He has ideals and will fight corruption, advance fiscal opportunity and responsibility, and make the ASUC accessible to more than a hundred visionless servants, the SA ASUC interns.
|
My 1 Month Vacation Is Over
Expect daily updates during elections. Oh, and check out www.calserve.org.
|
