The 40 Percent Plan will be put to a vote as a ballot measure on March 4, during DSG elections. If passed, the measure would amend DSG bylaws to allow students to decide how to allocate 40 percent of student programming funds. In the days leading up to the election, the architects of the 40 Percent Plan have begun reaching out to candidates running for DSG office, offering campaign support in return for candidates’ endorsement of the ballot measure. Allegations that this kind of political maneuvering resembles Super PAC tactics are overblown, but the comparison raises the question—are the campaigning tactics surrounding the 40 Percent Plan any different from the usual politicking that accompanies student elections?
In most ways, seeking endorsements from DSG candidates is no different from soliciting support from campus organizations. Student groups regularly endorse candidates whose platforms align most with their views. Soliciting endorsements from DSG candidates is a valid extension of this practice—as long as no retaliatory action is taken against candidates who choose not to support the plan.
The drafters of the 40 Percent Plan are, however, the first group in recent memory to offer political support in exchange for an endorsement of a single issue. This endorsement strategy represents a curious inversion of the typical issue-based campaign model—the proposal’s supporters are not encouraging students to vote for the candidate who supports their position on the issue but are, instead, hoping students will vote for the proposal if their preferred candidate supports it.
Regardless of whether or not the 40 Percent Plan passes, discussions surrounding the ballot measure have increased student involvement in campus governance. From encouraging open debates to prompting thoughtful columns, the initiative has sparked interest in, and scrutiny of, student politics. Importantly, the ballot initiative is the first to emerge out of a student petition and not from DSG. The involvement of student voices outside of DSG is a positive development and one that encourages a rich and productive discussion.
The ballot initiative also increases DSG’s accountability. Should the ballot measure pass, candidates who ran on the measure, and won, would have an obligation to implement the proposal. We have doubts about whether or not the architects of the 40 Percent Plan can enforce any of their quid pro quo endorsements, since very few people monitor the status of candidates’ election promises. Given that many of the 40 Percent Plan’s architects are seniors, the prospect of enforcement seems unlikely. And yet, simply by reviving the spirit of political participation on Duke’s campus and offering alternative models of engagement outside of student government, the 40 Percent Plan has already made a valuable contribution to campus life.
Get The Chronicle straight to your inbox
Signup for our weekly newsletter. Cancel at any time.