This column has nothing to do with Katie Fox.
I think she is a great person. She has great ideas, is a great student and has a great accent.
I think she’s a cool kid and know OU students would be fortunate to have someone of her caliber and drive advocating for students’ interests.
But a non-election for the highest student office of any entity is unacceptable.
UOSA must, if it actually cares about students, ascertain student interest by extending the filing deadline for UOSA presidential candidates.
When I read the headline about on Friday, I was both happy for Fox and sad for the future of UOSA.
When I read the headline “UOSA president decided by default” it took my imagination to less-than democratic countries of the world where default and democracy are often synonymous. I’m not equating a default UOSA president to a collapse in democracy, but it’s an important issue.
It is a fact that no one else filed in time, and this fact begs many questions.
Why didn’t anyone else file? Is it because we have a campus of lazy, unmotivated shmucks or because people were not well-informed of the opportunity?
If it’s the former, we clearly don’t need that type of leader. If it’s the latter, I think UOSA has an obligation to respond to students’ concerns and extend the filing deadline for candidates.
Raymond Rushing, UOSA election chair, said the filing deadline would not be extended because the open positions were advertised for four days prior to the deadline, in accordance with UOSA policy.
While this is true, people are always more important than policies. If there is a demonstrated interest in a deadline that would benefit students and add to discourse on campus, then UOSA should res`pond.
Of course, there are valid arguments against extending the filing deadline. That there is no need to reward procrastinators is one of the best such arguments.
I agree that there are consequences for all actions. However, the bad publicity surrounding a late filing would be a sufficient consequence for missing the original deadline. The time the opposing candidate would have lost in preparation would also be a consequence of a late filing.
Beyond the election, UOSA needs to do some soul-searching and decide how it can be more relevant to students.
If no one is running because they don’t see UOSA as effective, that is a problem.
While the effectiveness of UOSA is debated, denounced and doubted by many students outside UOSA, I know it instituted meaningful changes on campus.
President Amanda Holloway and Vice President Vince Winston most recently and Kenah Nyanat and Tati Cannon before them helped change student life at OU for the better, and I have no doubt Fox and Dewey Bartlett will as well.
I applaud Fox and Bartlett for having their act together and taking the initiative to follow the rules in a timely manner.
I hope the current UOSA executives will take steps to change the situation or start a meaningful conversation about UOSA that will benefit students in the long run.
I hope more students will get involved in the process or at least find it a process worth being part of.
Kayle Barnes is a professional writing senior.
The Oklahoma Daily is pleased to provide you the opportunity to share your thoughts about this article. We encourage lively debate on the issues of the day, but we ask you refrain from using profanity or other offensive speech, engaging in personal attacks or name-calling, posting advertising, or straying from the topic at hand. To comment, you must be a registered user of OUDaily.com. Thanks for taking the time to offer your thoughts.
You must be logged in to leave a comment. Log in | Register
kurtdavidson 3 years, 2 months ago
Students prepare for months to run for Student Body President. Someone who wants to be President generally knows the time period in which filing occurs, whether they have seen an ad or not. Additionally, it is completely unfair to those who actually followed the deadline. Do we really want a President that cannot get their act together to file for election in time? There is nothing wrong with the current policy. It has been effective for years. Students who are interested in representing the Student Body as a whole should be cognizant of deadlines.
mikedavis 3 years, 2 months ago
I for one want a president who knows how to follow deadlines. Your proposal to extend the filing deadline is a boon to procrastinators and an invitation for sloppy government. There is nothing wrong with the current policy. It is fair. It is straightforeward.
Additionally, there was not bad publicity for this election as is claimed in your column. In fact, it was advertised in The Daily, I know because I saw the ad! Don't insult your own great newspaper by claiming that its ads are ineffective.
I am happy about the future of the UOSA
mburris 3 years, 2 months ago
Kayle,
My favorite line from your article was this one, "UOSA must, if it actually cares about students, ascertain student interest by extending the filing deadline for UOSA presidential candidates." It really crystallizes a thought in my mind.
In that vein, I offer my counterpoint. I hope you don't mind, I stole your sentence structure.
Students must, if they care about their experience at OU, give a rat's ass about what is going on.
It's a well known fact that OU's campus is largely made up of, as you put it, "lazy, unmotivated shmucks." At every turn, from fee clarity to dead week to parking and on and on, UOSA, Student Congress, et al have done nothing but try and talk with students. Petitions, chalkings, forums, everything short of class action lawsuits, have been drummed up in the past in order to motivate the student body. To no avail.
I wouldn't call the people lazy, and not just because they elected me. They are apathetic. They think OU is a degree factory. It's relatively cheap, the problems seem petty, and, ultimately, they aren't really in it to better the experience. They want a degree, the rest is moot.
You and I and many of the leaders in UOSA are different. We want to better the situation for everyone. But, if people don't want to commit themselves to do it, I don't want them masquerading as "leaders" either.
It's a tired argument, and no one is more distressed by the lack of involvement on this campus than I am. That being said, we are wasting our time trying to force student activism down people's throats, which is what extending the deadline really means.
I respect that you want people to care. I also respect your willingness to advocate an argument that you know is flawed in order to try and find an answer to a bad situation. But, it just isn't going to happen.
Maybe, one day, the student body will care enough to run for UOSA President and Student Congress and CAC chair in record numbers. Until then, let's just be happy that capable, motivated people are advocating for the apathetic masses.
gawe6991 3 years, 2 months ago
While I disagree with Matthew Burris that those of us who do not run for UOSA seats are an "apathetic mass", I do share his opinion that Miss. Barnes' article is just trying to make an issue out of what is essentially fluff and chance.
The fact of the matter is that this year is an anomaly. Every year for around the last decade has seen an election with at least two candidates, and just because Fox and Bartlett are running unopposed should not be a signal to extend the deadline. I can think of plenty of other reasons that students would choose not to run. Perhaps they have noticed that UOSA tends to see us an "apathetic mass". Perhaps they notice that UOSA tends to get nothing meaningful accomplished. Perhaps they remember that disgraceful swimming complex fiasco, where an issue was literally shoved down our "throat". Perhaps they notice that, in the end, it is really President Boren and the Vice President of Student Affairs that actually change campus life (and, I say this with all sincerity: they do a great job). Students are students, wherever you go, so does Rep. Burris really think that OU's student body is some sort of rare creature, one that is inherently incapable of motivation? Please. I have witnessed what Student Congress does for the last four years. It is, essentially, a verbal battleground arena for highly motivated individuals looking to self-aggrandize and beef up their resumes.
"It's a well known fact that OU's campus is largely made up of, as you put it, "lazy, unmotivated shmucks.""
I don't even really know where to start on this one. Barnes and Burris should be ashamed of themselves. Why don't you ask President Boren if we are shmucks? How about people who benefit from OU's record-breaking involvement in the Big Event? What about the people that work night and day on Dance Marathon? The National Merit Scholars? Student Athletes? Or our Rhodes Scholars? Our future lawyers, dentists, and doctors? Just because some of us don't feel that oh-so-noble urge that our esteemed, dedicated, and tireless UOSA representatives (or biweekly opinion columnists) do does not allow one, or any of them, to call OU's students "lazy".
Thank God Fox and Bartlett care enough to run for UOSA president and vice-president. They seem to understand that name calling, rabble rousing, and high-minded posturing are not what OU's students look for in leaders.