Election Reform Gets Mixed Reviews

But many said limiting the length of the campaign period is not in the best interest of the student body.

"Making seeking student office more accessible to students is a worthwhile goal," said Aaron Nelson, the 1996-97 student body president. "But it is clear the details need to be worked out."

Student leaders are looking to make running for a student government office more accessible by using student activity fees to fund campaigns and limiting both the time and money spent on student elections.

The proposed change would limit campaign funds for student body president to $300 for the general election period and $100 for a runoff election.

Spending limits allow candidates to spend $500 for the general election and an additional $250 for the runoff election -- all at each candidate's own expense.

"The message this sends is one, student government wants to be more open, and, two, they want to get people to focus more on issues and rely less on posters," said Nic Heinke, 1999-2000 student body president.

Many former student body presidents said funding campaigns with student activity fees could open doors for more qualified applicants.

"It is definitely the people who have more financial resources that seriously consider (running for student body president)," said Reyna Walters, 1998-99 student body president.

By using public financing to fund campaigns, Nelson said, "It is clear student leadership is invested in growing student leaders."

Heinke said he thinks limiting the amount of money candidates can spend on their campaigns would force candidates to be more creative with their approaches.

But others who have campaigned said they believe that limiting funds will stifle a candidate's accessibility to students.

"I think that you can maximize the student body's time to get to know the candidates by giving them more money," said Lee Conner, who ran against Nelson and also served as the Graduate and Professional Student Federation president in 1999-2000.

Lowering spending limits also brings up the concern of candidates not reporting all spending, Conner said.

"In almost every student body president race, at least one candidate spends money and doesn't report it," he said.

Conner said that after spending limits were increased to $500 in 1999, fewer people cheated. He also said that if both the time and the budget for the election period are shrunk, candidates could begin cheating again.

Former presidents had mixed views about student leaders' proposal to shorten the time period from 21 days to 14 days that candidates spend campaigning.

Heinke said he thinks shrinking the campaign period will make candidates focus more on their platforms. "I think that shortening the campaign period will force people to focus on a candidate's message," he said.

Conner said extra time allows a candidate to have a stronger campaign. "The more money and the more time a candidate has, the more students will be able to make informed decisions," he said.

But Walters thought the extra week of campaigning helped her to get her message across. "I didn't know if I could take that extra week, but I knew it helped me."

Other former presidents also said they feel that this limitation will inhibit the election process. Nelson said, "People need a sufficient period of time to become known as candidates."

The University Editor can be reached at udesk@unc.edu.