The Daily Emerald Opinion Desk and its columnists operate separately from the Emerald newsroom. This endorsement reflects the opinions of columnist Aishiki Nag, and not of all Opinion Desk editors or columnists. No newsroom editor, reporters, managing editor or the Editor-in-Chief was involved in the editing or production of the content in this endorsement.
On April 1, The Daily Emerald hosted a debate with the 2025 running candidates, Taliek Lopez-DuBoff representing Unite UO and Prissila Moreno representing UO Student Power; through the discussion, Moreno’s performance and ability to lead proved to be the better option for ASUO for 2025.
The debate itself covered a wide range of topics, such as: protecting diversity, equity and inclusion initiatives amidst federal actions undermining them, addressing the remarkably low ASUO election turnouts, touching on student protestors getting code of conduct violations for peaceful protests and questions around financial transparency.
I believe a key sign of good leadership, especially in representative democracies, is a person’s ability to portray their platform and team. Through the debate, Moreno did an outstanding job pointing to specific policy goals and specific groups on campus that UO Student Power was associated with, which, in comparison, Lopez-DuBoff lacked in communicating.
Moreno quickly pointed out this tactic of using “buzzwords” and pointed to Lopez-DuBoff’s tendency to point to the institutional limitations of creating deliverable action.
“This has been an organization of red-tape and inaction,” Moreno said.
Moreno outlined in her opening statement her work experience within the ASUO’s finance committee and her work with various on-campus advocacy groups, such as Oregon State Public Interest Research Group (OSPIRG). UO Student Power’s extensive community building initiatives have a strong background in organizing, with various successful campaigns across local, state and federal platforms.
Moreno emphasized the background of the UO Student Power slate as organizers.
“We are going to do this work. We have been (doing this work). We have been fighting for climate justice, racial equity, labor organizing and we show up and we act with you,” Moreno said.
Some of the mentioned organizers come from students associated with various unions on campus, the Climate Justice League and OSPIRG.
Moreno said, “In the past couple of days, we’ve had over 700 conversations, and I think that’s a testament to the organizing that we’re able to do out there on campus.”
During the overall policy section of the debate, Moreno mentioned the top policy priorities for UO Student Power would be to integrate abortion and gender affirming care within the campus health center, integrating Food for Lane County with the on-campus pantry, expanding Emerald Express (EmX) routes to reach popular grocery stores and working on increasing representation for campus unions, such as appointing more secretary of labors.
Moreno also advocated for a Movimiento Estudiantil Chicanx de Aztlán (MEChA) and South Asian, Southwest Asian and North African (SSWANA) cultural center on campus, reinforcing the importance of multiculturalism on campus.
During the debate, Lopez-DuBoff stressed the importance of building a diverse cabinet with sufficient training, protecting safe spaces on campus, continuing to support UO’s Basic Needs Program for their various initiatives and promoting student engagement efforts. Many initiatives echo the current ASUO agenda and parallel the status quo.
It’s important to mention that Unite UO has published a more thorough policy platform on their Instagram. However, this was published after the debate.
One of the striking moments from the debate was addressing political neutrality and the role ASUO should take.
By following the ethos of the Harvard Institutional Voice Working Group’s report on the institutional voice, they argue for the importance of institutional bodies to speak out and address issues directed toward the student body and the “core function” of a university.
Moreno began the argument stating, “In times like this, the ASUO can’t afford to be politically neutral, and we need to stand up for our students,” arguing the political power institutions like the ASUO have in shaping the lives and realities of students.
Although Lopez-DuBoff didn’t disregard the importance of the insisting power ASUO has, he framed the emergency around providing basic needs, housing and healthcare as inherently “not political.” He argued that “education is the great equalizer” and that it didn’t take a political party to stand together.
Moreno had rebutted the neutrality of that statement by stating the reality of the social climate we are now living in.
“I don’t see how not being political will protect our students from political decisions,” Moreno said.
Both candidates have impressive resumes and admirable dedication to the UO community. However, Moreno’s platform and her slate’s extensive background in community organizing is more important than ever to create a unified campus and work together to fight for what every student needs.
