Posted on April 5, 2007
Though it’s an annual event for the entire JMU student population, this spring’s student body major election, which is now it its second day of voting, has separated itself from the pack.
This year, junior Brandon Eickel is the only name that appears on the ballot running for student body president, which is quite rare, according to SGA and Elections Commission members.
Even Eickel himself, who was unopposed for quite some time, was in disbelief that only recently someone decided to run against him.
“I was kind of shocked for a position like this,” Eickel said.
He added, “There should be at least two people [running].”
The situation has not been without controversy.
Junior Ilk Ghavami, who was formerly vying for senior class president but is now running against Eickel as a write-in student body presidential candidate, decided to run against Eickel on March 28 after he overheard the race was uncontested.
“The essence of student government is to have different ideas, all different kinds of people where you choose what you want,” Ghavami said. “You should have the ability to choose.”
March 28 at 5 p.m. was the deadline for any prospective candidates to give the SGA the proper forms and documentation, which include but are not limited to their platform points and several student signatures. Ghavami, after handing in his packet at 5 p.m. to Elections Commission Co-commissioner Matt Winer (Jr.), said he wished he had more time to change his materials so he could run for student body president instead, eliminating the then-uncontested race.
Since he was initially running for senior class president, Ghavami had 100 student signatures in his packet. Winer said 200 are needed to run for any Executive Council position.
It was then, Ghavami said, that Winer told him he could run for student body president and appear on the ballot if he refilled his forms and obtained the 100 extra signatures by 9 p.m. that day.
Winer, who has headed the Elections Commission for two years and has been a member for three, said he made the decision because the presidential race was unopposed.
“When I realized that the race for president was uncontested this year, I was greatly disappointed,” Winer said.
But, Winer said he did not realize his decision was a breach of the rules. After discussing the issue with other Elections Commission members, Winer said he told Ghavami that what he previously said his previous statement was incorrect. Ghavami would only be eligible to run for student body president as a write-in candidate since it was past the deadline.
“It was a decision made without really thinking about it,” Winer said. “It was not in my place to do so and I realized that afterwards.”
He added, “It wasn’t really fair [for Ghavami] to go out and have all this extra time that no one else had.”
Ghavami disagreed.
“I don’t think it’s unfair,” he said. “It goes by the fact that you are trying to get someone to represent the student body. You need to have a choice.”
He added that he thinks write-ins have a disadvantage because of the large reliance on student initiative. Write-in candidates are put on the ballot during voting by individual students, and have to follow the same regulations as registered candidates.
“You have to get your name out somehow,” he said.
Eickel agreed.
“It’s got to be a lot more difficult to have students physically type in someone’s name,” he said. But, as for far as being unopposed and having only his name on the ballot, Eickel said this has not changed his campaigning or his initiative to keep his position.
“Even when I thought I was unopposed, I was still going all out,” he said.
