Vote Schork for president

When students vote for next year’s Duke Student Government president tomorrow, they will choose among three vastly different candidates.

Junior Isaac Mizrahi, a recently appointed residence life and dining senator, has positioned himself as an impassioned student government outsider who will advocate on behalf of a diverse range of cultural and social groups. Executive Vice President Pete Schork, a junior, is a long-time DSG representative who brings pragmatism and levelheadedness to the field. And junior Ashley Jordan, a Central Campus representative to Campus Council, is running a campaign fueled primarily by her frustration with DSG’s decision to absorb the residential policy-making council.

We were struck by Mizrahi’s genuine passion for cultural groups, Tailgate reform and an assortment of other issues. Mizrahi accused past student leaders of failing to recognize DSG’s potential clout, and we wholeheartedly agree with his claim that too many student body presidents come to view administrative contacts as personal role models rather than peers.

But Mizrahi’s rhetoric too often devolved into a disorganized rant. In many areas his passion came at the expense of substantive thinking. For example, his suggestion that students should be punished if they attend Tailgate and skip the football game is illogical. Overall, Mizrahi’s platform trades substance and relevance for ideology.

Schork is the clear choice in this race because of his institutional knowledge and his strategic approach to student advocacy. Although he did not exhibit the overt passion of Mizrahi, Schork struck a succinct and substantive tone that reflected his three years of commitment to DSG. He aptly identified the transition to the house model and the renovation of the West Union Building as the two most pressing issues student government will face next year. He also offered thoughtful perspectives on Curriculum 2000 and Tailgate—an issue on which he has been a staunch but reasonable advocate for three years.

While we believe Schork will make an excellent symbolic leader, we are equally confident in his ability to exercise formal leadership over the DSG Senate and cabinet. In particular, he aims to provide mentorship to individual senators and involve more members of the executive council and the cabinet in the lobbying process.

Schork’s self-awareness mitigates our concerns about his presidency. He showed cognizance of the fact that he will encounter skepticism as a “DSG lifer.” And, on the problem of administrative roadblocks, Schork offered the most innovative proposal we have seen: Use DSG’s relationship with the Board of Trustees to go over the heads of the administration when they disregard students’ concerns. This goal should be faithfully pursued.

Schork still has much to prove. He must show that he can be more than an aggregator for students’ concerns, especially those of minority groups. And we hope he will shed his calm demeanor and adopt a more ardent tone when the situation demands it. But Schork’s experience and strategic skills make him the best candidate by a wide margin over the reckless Mizrahi and the unknowledgeable Jordan.