TheSkiffView
CHOICE
PC should have scheduled a re-vote

When people go to vote, they expect their vote to count. On Tuesday the meaning of a vote was lost.

As Programming Council members met to discuss how to tackle the withdrawal of a Mr. TCU candidate after he was told he violated elections rules, they chose instead to dismiss an opportunity for a re-vote. Their argument is that the popular vote only accounts for 40 percent of the selection process, which also includes the candidate’s resume and interview, both accounting for 30 percent each.

While we recognize the popular vote does not account for much, denying the importance of those who did vote does. By deciding against a re-vote, Programming Council set a bad precedence toward student democracy and the meaning behind a vote.

When Brad Thompson withdrew his name from Mr. TCU contention Tuesday, a re-vote should have been scheduled to occur if not Wednesday than at least for today. The Programming Council did not make a decision until Wednesday — a full day after Thompson withdrew. PC should have called an emergency meeting immediately, thus giving them enough time to schedule a re-vote. The circumstance certainly merited one.

By the time PC met Wednesday, it was probably too late for the election to be rescheduled.

While we applaud Thompson’s integrity for withdrawing from the election, Programming Council’s decision to deny a re-vote is unmerited.