Anyone who paid attention to last week’s Student Government Association elections knows how problematic it was, and the real sham the process has become. As an SGA senator for the past two years, I had the opportunity to witness the inner workings. SGA elections have essentially become a transfer of power, where an underclassman on an incumbent board will run the following year and win. There is essentially no chance for an outsider to win an executive board election. Where is the democracy in this process?

In 2006, Cuban dictator Fidel Castro relinquished his power within the government and transferred it to his brother, Raul, under the guise of following the country’s constitutional election policy, in which the younger Castro ran unopposed. I am not directly comparing SGA to a communist dictatorship, but I am saying the election process has not been open and democratic. In the past, members of SGA have been referred to as elitist and isolated from the student body. This year those words have a ring of truth to them.

It is reckless to blame the student body for lack of interest when the SGA itself is truly at fault. Communication breakdowns and lack of advertising were the main causes for only one party running for Executive Board. The only communication was an Intercom message that went out three days before the election packets were due. The general population did not even know there was an election forthcoming until after entrance deadlines had already passed. This lack of communication is actually self-serving. If no one knows about elections, then there will be no competition for positions.

This is certainly not the first time SGA has encountered election problems. Two years ago, one party ran unopposed, and last year only one party was going to run until the deadline was extended for more participants. Those parties, including one led by myself, only came forward because the head of the lone party, SGA President Cornell Woodson, encouraged opposing parties to run against his group for the good of the campus. This was a noble action undertaken by Woodson, but in truth it was still problematic because none of the three parties truly believed they had a chance to win. That party had been planning for months and had incumbent members from the previous year’s board.

In a year of a truly historic presidential election, the events surrounding the SGA election are completely disheartening. Imagine election night last November if the Obamas were taking the stage and celebrating a victory, and there was no opponent giving a concession speech. It feels hollow. If the McCain and Palin ticket did not run, then the victory would have felt cheated to some degree. I say it is time for a change for the Ithaca College SGA. This group has proven that it is completely incapable of handling its own elections. A non-partisan group on campus should be in charge of this task, which would instantly take the conflict-of-interest problem out of the equation. In the future, elections should become more than just a simple transfer of power.

In a perfect world, “the Fundamentalist Party” would relinquish their empty Executive Board victory and call for a new democratic election. It is better to wait and get it done right than for the election to be rushed and the results feel like the Bush victory in Florida in 2000. Until then, students will continue to feel disconnected with our “elected student leaders.” SGA must come to terms that it no longer represents the voice of the student body.

Michael Bender is a senior legal studies major. E-mail him at mbender1@ithaca.edu.