TO THE EDITOR:
The article titled “GPSF asks for changes …” published on Oct. 25 addresses an important conversation happening between members of GPSF and Student Congress, but it misrepresents the timeline and motivation behind the emergency meeting request. http://www.dailytarheel.com/article/2016/10/gpsf-asks-for-changes-to-referendum-one-week-before-the-vote
To address the first issue, the date of the election was unclear until last week. This is evidenced by numerous communications from Congress, including a DTH article, that incorrectly state the election date as Nov. 5. After clarification of an Oct. 28 election date, it came to the attention of GPSF that Oct. 18 meetings were canceled, shifting the schedule a week and eliminating our ability to present “Two for Two” to Congress before the election.
To address the second and more important issue, Congressional approval is the only way to lower the threshold for success to the same level as “Better Together”.
Given that 50.2 percent of students ranked “Two for Two” No. 1, and only 33.7 percent did so for “Better Together” last spring, students have a clear preference that should be supported by their leaders.
Neither President Russell nor GPSF have ever advocated to change the “Yes-No” vote.
Instead, we are concerned with the presentation of the competing referendums.
If they are not displayed and described in a way that makes it clear they are in opposition, unintentional double “yes” votes will create problematic election result interpretation.
Speaker Simons’ denial of our request clearly demonstrates that he prioritizes his own interests over the interests of the students he is supposed to represent.
