Picking the right candidates for any public office is a sort of balancing act, if done correctly – candidates must be experienced and educated but not beholden to entrenched special interests, they must be governed by a set of values (what some might call an ideology) but also be willing to compromise and cooperate when appropriate. They must be responsive to their constituents’ interests, but not so enraptured in public opinion as to be unable to make the right decision even when it is not the most popular. They cannot be out of touch and must be fit to lead; they must be confident but not self-serving.
Within the context of the ASUO, candidates must possess one other important quality: the humility to recognize the limitations of their office and the ability to make those limitations work for them, rather than to descend into fruitless debate or self-important triviality. For far too long, the ASUO has been an institution of perpetual crisis, consistently engaged in heated argument around issues of menial consequence while virtually apathetic and unresponsive to those matters of greater importance.
The Emerald editorial board believes, by virtue of these considerations, that Emma Kallaway and Getachew Kassa are the best candidates for the office of ASUO Executive. Both Kallaway and Kassa have been valuable participants in the various functions of the ASUO, but are not so invested in a particular political establishment as to lack a commitment to the entire student body.
Kallaway and Kassa present a broad agenda, specific as to policy ideas and apparently guided by core values that show a commitment to student interests. A few examples: They want to increase campus safety measures, put more textbooks on reserve, use tax credits to build revenue, and make permanent sustainable options like the compost program in University Housing and the Bike Loan Program. They also demonstrate in their agenda an understanding that students must organize if they are to truly achieve the change they seek, and that ultimately the ASUO presents an important vehicle for this kind of organization. This is an understanding we believe is critical to the leadership of the ASUO right now, and one that too often seems lacking among the ranks of the ASUO hopeful.
This year, determining the contrasts between the various candidates (and slates) appears particularly difficult. All seem to share a strikingly similar agenda, perhaps with one more supportive of a 24-hour library than another. Nonetheless, our decision comes from an attempt to appreciate not only a candidate’s campaign rhetoric but also his or her legislative past and demonstrated ability to effectively organize and articulate compelling principles upon which his or her policies rely.
Students First has gone the route of suggesting an abandonment of ideology altogether, proposing to govern on a sort of case-by-case basis. While we appreciate flexibility and willingness toward cooperation, rejecting the foundation of core values only disorganizes leadership and makes it difficult for voters to know what to expect – if anything – of these potential leaders.
The Oregon Action Team, this year, appears to hold certain core values as critical – integrity, responsibility, fiscal conservatism, student involvement – but at the same time appears prone to engagement in the petty and partisan gamesmanship that calls those very values into question.
True Blue Student Coalition has done a remarkable job of crafting an effective message and using creative, dynamic tools to express it. It has been politically wise to borrow heavily from electoral strategies of recent success to leaders on the national stage. But when so much is adopted from the work of others, a true commitment to one’s own core values can be harder to ascertain, much less govern upon. And ultimately, the platform seems too dependent on large-scale promotion, and based too much on talking points without sound ideas and proposals to back them up.
Kallaway and Kassa seem less interested in engaging in the political theater that has, at times, defined the ASUO. Instead, their more modest focus seems mostly on determining how best to improve the lives of students. As a result, they seem the most genuinely interested in involving the “everyday student” that has so often been touted in ASUO decision-making. They possess a commanding knowledge of the ASUO’s procedures and limitations while exhibiting a sincerity of dedication that extends beyond personal ambitions. We also commend their commitment to run as independents rather than as water-bearers for one of a group of slates, which have grown increasingly, and dangerously, entrenched in recent years.
It is with this endorsement that the editorial board presents a qualification: We hope Kallaway and Kassa demonstrate more soundly the capacity to take firm stances against the administration and ASUO establishment when it serves the good of their constituents. We hope that, if elected, they hire to their government people who are not only competent and caring administrators but also formidable strategists who can zealously defend a student-interested agenda when need be. Finally, we think it is important that all students exercise their right to participate in selecting next year’s ASUO, no matter their chosen candidate. In a contest of historically low turnout, and therefore consequence, the simple act of choosing to vote has the potential to make a difference.