Commentary: DSG president speaks out

Over the past couple of weeks, Duke Student Government has been the subject of numerous articles and opinion pieces. This can be directly attributed to the fact that many controversial issues (e.g. restructuring, veto, etc.) have come to the surface. I would like to take the time right now to help clarify and add closure to some of these issues.

Allow me to first concentrate on the Instant Runoff Voting system. The IRV system is one that allows every student to rank candidates from most favorite to least favorite instead of just selecting one top candidate. With this ranking system, assuming no candidate receives over 50 percent of the votes, there would be an instant runoff between the top candidates. The computer program that supports this system uses the ranking of the voters who did not support any of the top candidates to redistribute votes until one of the top candidates receives a majority.

I had and still have some reservations with this new voting system. Primarily, I believe that the original motives behind this by-law change were based on a personal attack. Though this was both unprofessional and unwarranted, I am willing to overlook these motives for the betterment of the overall voting system and DSG as a whole. Another concern of mine is the timing with which we have to implement such a system. As of now, we stand two weeks away from the executive election. It is unfair to force the candidates to change campaign strategies that were in place months in advance. Furthermore, because the student body has not yet been well educated on this new system, students may not fully understand the implications of the rankings. Lastly, but most importantly, DSG historically has not been the best when it comes to administrating elections. Complicating the administration of elections two weeks before will put us at risk for failure.

After thoroughly contemplating this issue and looking at the proposed voting system objectively, I decided not to veto it. I am purely interested in working for the betterment of the student body and have no interest in petty politics. If a public compromise here leads to the adoption of a new governance structure which will help us achieve a better student government, I am all for it. With all of this said, I strongly encourage the proponents of IRV to wait until next year to implement this new system. Postponing IRV for a year is in the best interests of the students, the new executive candidates and the organization as a whole. Please take my recommendation very seriously.

When examined closely, the new IRV system works perfectly with my new model for DSG. While the mention of my new model has been tossed around in The Chronicle for the past few weeks, its details have not been included. In my new model, DSG will have the executive branch run as a ticket. The president, the executive vice president and a third position called the chancellor will run together on one ticket. The current vice presidents of the four standing committees will be internally elected by the legislative body and will be re-named committee chairmen. The legislative branch changes from having a legislature to having a senate. Total membership of the legislative branch decreases from 50 members to 35. The make up of the senate will be 16 class officers - respective class presidents, vice presidents, secretaries and treasurers. As a collective unit, class officers will be responsible for providing programming for their class. Outside of the class officers, there will be a total of 14 residentially based senators. There will be a total of five at-large senator positions, which will be selected through an application process. My new system will increase the level of accountability for the president, and it will give the overall organization succinct goals for the year, which will make the organization more efficient.

Before I conclude, I would like to clarify what I meant when I said that DSG is "ineffective" and "inefficient." Being ineffective does not imply that we neither work hard nor have the best intentions. What it does mean is that we are not serving the student body to the extent we are capable of. This is the direct result of our current structure, which does not allow us to deal with a high level of controversy. We waste energy bickering with each other rather than focusing on producing for the student body. The one-ticket system will solve this problem once and for all.

Now it is important that you, the students, speak up on this issue. Would you like to make DSG more effective and accountable? If so, ask the executive candidates what their plans are for restructuring of the organization. I have shared a copy of my new model with each executive candidate who has asked, and I hope that if elected they will use it as a starting point. Good luck to all of the executive candidates who will have the responsibility to implement a new DSG model.

Joshua Jean-Baptiste is a Trinity senior and president of DSG.