House Editorial: SGA runoff election shouldn’t happen

Posted on October 8, 2007

The recent SGA elections proved to be unsurprising with a runoff election in order. There was little over half of a point of difference between the two candidates last Thursday, with Lee Brooks and Ilk Ghavami both receiving just over 49 percent of the votes for student body president. So, despite Ghavami squeaking by with just 19 more votes than Brooks, there is no winner.

Candidates need a majority to win, meaning in this case 50 percent plus one vote was needed to declare a winner. The small number of write-ins on the ballots was enough to prevent a majority from being achieved. 

The SGA’s current policy makes it incredibly difficult to secure a winner during the first round of elections. Instead of requiring the near-impossible feat of garnering 50 percent of voters’ support, the SGA should change its election policy to require a plurality rather than a majority to win. This would enable the candidate with the most overall votes to take the position. Even in 2003 the flaw in the majority system was evident when four candidates ran for the position of student body president, forcing a runoff election. A clear winner would have been designated if only a plurality was required, as the leading candidate had 45 percent of the vote.

We support the idea of having the opportunity to write in candidates’ names because we feel this is the essence of democratic decision-making. Our bet would be that many apathetic students write in ridiculous names like Mickey Mouse or Jon Stewart or volunteer their unknowing roommate or fellow classmate to be president – but it is still an important part of the process and the initial votes should be used to determine the winner. Runoff elections might be less effective because it could be difficult to draw the same amount of voters as in the initial election.

Runoff elections are a waste of time and money. They also create unneeded anxiety for the candidates involved in this nail-biting procedure. What could be accomplished with a week of campaigning and two days of voting must be prolonged to two weeks of campaigning and four days of voting. Twice the campaigning time also means twice the funds needed to spread your name around JMU.

Plurality would simplify the process and allow the student body to cast their vote and elect their leaders based on highest numbers, but not a specific ratio.