As the former Associated Student Body vice president, I am frustrated to see only two black people elected to the ASB Senate this year.
During my 2015-2016 term, ASB officials and I wanted to change the system to make the ASB Senate more competitive and reflective of campus demographics.
We cut the seats down to 48 and reapportioned them to Registered Student Organizations (RSOs) and schools. By isolating certain communities through RSO categories, underrepresented groups would have a direct bid into ASB. Last year, our new system worked.
The following information comes from a survey filled out by 2015 ASB Senators, facts from the university website, and current ASB officials:
Twenty-two percent of the ASB senators identified as ethnic minorities. Furthermore, 10.2 percent identified as black and one ASB senator identified as Ugandan. In the 2015-2016 academic year, black students composed 13.4 percent of our campus, and 23 percent of the student population were ethnic minorities.
Fifty-three percent were out-of-state students, and 47 percent were in-state students. At that time, 56.1 percent of the campus was in-state, and 43.9 percent was out-of-state. In addition, two more ASB senators were international students from the Middle East and Ecuador.
Fifty-three percent were female, and 47 percent were male. On campus, 55 percent of the students were female, and 45 percent were male.
Contrary to our campus, 80 percent of the ASB senators identified as Greek. However, 17 different chapters from NPHC, IFC and NPC were represented.
So, why doesn’t senate mirror campus like this now?
In the first election on Sept. 13, nobody ran for 13 of our 48 seats. Per the ASB Constitution and Code (Title V, Subtitle G, Section 129, A), “Whenever 10 percent or more of the seats of the Campus Senate shall become vacant, the attorney general shall hold a special election to fill all seats that are currently open.” Those seats become at-large, available to all students.
Who did not run the first time around? Per the ASB attorney general’s office, NPHC did not endorse candidates for their two seats. Both multicultural/cultural and special interest organizations left one of their two seats open. Furthermore, sponsored, academic/professional and honors/honorary organizations did not endorse any candidates, and graduate, pharmacy and an applied science seat became open. Last year, six of these 13 seats were filled by ethnic minority students.
Instead of inquiring why only two black students were elected, ask, “Why wasn’t the effort made to ensure these 13 seats were filled before the election on the 13th?”
The effort was not made, therefore it is everybody’s fault.
Next year, students, be proactive. ASB officials must ensure that the RSOs understand how to run for their seats, and organizations must endorse candidates.
In the special election on Sept. 27, 65 people competed for only 13 seats. An open election makes it possible for groups to create a ticket, spread the word and aim to keep certain minority groups out. Then, a white, Greek male from Mississippi can take the seat that could be occupied by a non-Greek, female, minority student from a different country.
Students, do not let the seats become open to anyone. Currently, organized groups exist who intend to retrogress our campus to a period of exclusivity.
By shouting for “Dixie” at games and donning items decorated with the polarizing Confederate flag, some students desire to be back in the land of cotton where old times were not forgotten. Whichever group— students desiring inclusivity or those wanting exclusivity—becomes the most organized will win, and in most cases, minorities lose to majorities.
The system is not perfect. However, used correctly, the system provides the opportunity for an ASB Senate that reflects our student body.
John Brahan is senior theater and public policy major from Hattiesburg.
