The IFC’s behavior in the spring elections was not scandalous

This year’s Associated Students election seems to be of the most controversial events of the year.

As of last Thursday, at around 8 pm, the winning candidates were announced in the Hub for this next year’s AS elected positions. Voted wholly by the students, and for the students, the results and affiliated parties are as follows:

A few days later, on Monday night, a letter addressed to the student body was sent to the UCSB press stating some pretty bold accusations. The letter failed to make an appearance before any of the candidates or parties involved in the election beforehand.

Enclosed in the letter was what the UCSB Elections Board believe to be an issue affecting the integrity of spring elections. This issue suggests a violation of code with regards to the monetary incentive given by the inter-fraternity council to the individual fraternities with the highest voter turn out. The agreement among the houses, and in regards to the competition set in place by the Counsel, is that the money will be awarded to the winning fraternities’ philanthropy.

This practice has been happening for several years now, but has suddenly become a problem during this election season. IFC has been using these grants throughout the years to push fraternities and greek organizations to participate in more school-wide events, and it has been proven it to work.

Approved years ago by the Office of Student Life on campus, the money is not awarded to an individual or any particular candidate, it is given to the charity that the winning fraternity supports.

Understandably the debate on campus has been heated:

More so, this accessible benefit never pushed or supported any particular party or candidate. It offered no incentive to vote for anything specific, and it served merely as a motivator for people to vote. With that in mind, the notion that there was a “monetary incentive given to members of this community that placed more value on certain students’ votes” appears rather inaccurate, and potentially false.

No votes were bought. No votes were sold. A simple encouragement to less-participating groups was presented. The potential benefit was purely an attempt to reach a large number of people in the short amount of time allotted for campaigning.

Greek life and IFC used their connections to branch out to a large group of people in an attempt to get voting numbers higher and more students involved in the political processes here at UCSB… NOT to vote for any specific party or candidate.

Another fallacy of the Board of Elections is their distribution of information.

A late night email to the school newspapers before informing the candidates and parties involved of the problem is completely inappropriate.

Just as inappropriate is the public eye which has pleaded ignorance regarding the personal threats and crude memes made against members of Campus United and other Independent candidates on campus (especially those parties who have been associated with Greek life in the past).

With an opposing party as its profile picture, a Facebook user, who we have chosen not to name,  posted personal information (i.e. phone numbers) of these same previously mentioned candidates.

For anyone that is worried that this money is being taken away from students or other organizations – you need not be concerned.

Some students have compares it to how “some companies offer their employees rebates, coupons, or a half day off for voting” Is that not the same type of incentive as IFC’s?

Still, many students are concerned and support the re-vote that may end up taking place.

The takeaway?

The IFC grant money in question (compiled by all the fraternities involved with the organization) was granted then to those fraternities who hit a 90 per cent quota of voter registration in their respective chapter. That grant money was then donated to the charity of their choice.

The IFC motivation did not promote any specific party or candidate.

The charitable motivation posed no threat to any party, but rather increased the student body’s participation in AS elections this year – hitting 32 per cent of undergraduate students. It is an approved policy which means no harm, and it seeks to provide our campus with a wider variety of voters and more involved greek affiliates.

If you would like your voice to be heard on the matter, the senate meeting will be held in the Corwin Pavilion in the UCen @6:30 pm on Wednesday, April 27. Where everyone is welcome to join and debate this issue.

The Tab is a platform for free speech and debate on campus,  if you disagree with this view and want to put your own across. Get in touch by messaging The Tab UCSB on Facebook