Eligibility in question
Ed Komenda and Bita Sonouni
Issue date: 4/8/09 Section: News
A resolution authored by several Student Government Association members to keep presidential candidate Tony Thomas on the ballot, despite his failure to obtain the minimum GPA requirement, was presented and passed after much debate at Tuesday's meeting.
"The Election Committee was planning to remove me from the ballot because of my GPA," Thomas said when asked about why the resolution was originally brought to the table.
The resolution stated, "Presidential Candidate Tony Thomas has provided acceptable documentation to show that he is currently undergoing a grade change and meets the requirements to continue in this election."
Thomas supporters, such as SGA Senator Walter Malecki, said that it would be an injustice to take Thomas off the ballot.
"Bottom line is that he met the GPA requirement by the time voting started," said SGA Senator Jordan Liles. "I see no reason why he shouldn't be on the ballot."
According to Thomas, he thought he was being considered for removal from the elections because his GPA was lower than a 2.75. Thomas claimed that he had a grade change within the Department of Broadcasting and is now eligible to be a candidate.
Several SGA senators inquired why Thomas' name was on the ballot if he did not originally meet the GPA requirements.
SGA President Robert Dulski said, "the names for Candidates on STARS were entered in last Monday, and the issue at hand was dealt with that Friday. It was too late for the names to be changed or removed."
SGA Senator-at-Large Chris Bronson added comment of his own, stating that it's not right to follow some rules while ignoring others.
"Are we just going to pick and choose what rules we follow and what we don't follow?" Bronson said.
SGA advisor Ann Comerford said she believes the election should go on as planned.
"There is an election going on, and I think people need to let the process go as it is," Comerford said. "There's people's names on the ballot, and students have already been voting, but this body needs to make sure that these students have a voice.
"There is a process going on, and this body needs to make sure that it has its integrity intact when this week is over," she added.
Comerford also pointed out that candidates and their qualifications will be evaluated on Thursday, April 9 when the election results are determined.
Associate Vice President for Student Services Earl Bracey had a different opinion about the debate, questioning why the issue was brought up at all.
"How can you be pre-emptive about what the election committee might do?" Bracey asked. "You have empowered them through your constitution to come together and make a judgment call, and they haven't made that judgment call. You are assuming what that call might be, and you are already assuming it is not appropriate and unreasonable. I don't know what you are voting on."
"The Election Committee was planning to remove me from the ballot because of my GPA," Thomas said when asked about why the resolution was originally brought to the table.
The resolution stated, "Presidential Candidate Tony Thomas has provided acceptable documentation to show that he is currently undergoing a grade change and meets the requirements to continue in this election."
Thomas supporters, such as SGA Senator Walter Malecki, said that it would be an injustice to take Thomas off the ballot.
"Bottom line is that he met the GPA requirement by the time voting started," said SGA Senator Jordan Liles. "I see no reason why he shouldn't be on the ballot."
According to Thomas, he thought he was being considered for removal from the elections because his GPA was lower than a 2.75. Thomas claimed that he had a grade change within the Department of Broadcasting and is now eligible to be a candidate.
Several SGA senators inquired why Thomas' name was on the ballot if he did not originally meet the GPA requirements.
SGA President Robert Dulski said, "the names for Candidates on STARS were entered in last Monday, and the issue at hand was dealt with that Friday. It was too late for the names to be changed or removed."
SGA Senator-at-Large Chris Bronson added comment of his own, stating that it's not right to follow some rules while ignoring others.
"Are we just going to pick and choose what rules we follow and what we don't follow?" Bronson said.
SGA advisor Ann Comerford said she believes the election should go on as planned.
"There is an election going on, and I think people need to let the process go as it is," Comerford said. "There's people's names on the ballot, and students have already been voting, but this body needs to make sure that these students have a voice.
"There is a process going on, and this body needs to make sure that it has its integrity intact when this week is over," she added.
Comerford also pointed out that candidates and their qualifications will be evaluated on Thursday, April 9 when the election results are determined.
Associate Vice President for Student Services Earl Bracey had a different opinion about the debate, questioning why the issue was brought up at all.
"How can you be pre-emptive about what the election committee might do?" Bracey asked. "You have empowered them through your constitution to come together and make a judgment call, and they haven't made that judgment call. You are assuming what that call might be, and you are already assuming it is not appropriate and unreasonable. I don't know what you are voting on."
Viewing Comments 1 - 9 of 12
John
posted 4/08/09 @ 10:01 AM CST
So we have a person unfit to be President. Why should it be different at Western? We have an non-U.S. citizen running around the White House right now pretending to be running the country. (Continued…)
Tracy
posted 4/08/09 @ 10:38 AM CST
John I have no response as to wether or not the student remains on the ballot, because I agree, "the rules are the rules, and they should be abided by, but your comment about President Obama is so unpatiotic. (Continued…)
SGA?
posted 4/08/09 @ 11:12 AM CST
SGA has become an embarrassment to the student body, and they continue to tarnish their reputation with each passing week. At what point will they stop the internal bickering and start representing the students of WIU?
Gary W. Craig
posted 4/08/09 @ 2:52 PM CST
This article caught my eye and reminded me of my time on the Student Government Association in 1973. As a Vietnam veteran, I wanted to re-engage in campus life and help in the well-being of students. (Continued…)
Bob
posted 4/08/09 @ 4:14 PM CST
I wouldn't want somebody with a 2.75 serving as SGA president anyway, regardless of the grade change.
Brittany
posted 4/09/09 @ 8:32 AM CST
Just because someone has a 2.75 gpa does not mean that he's "UNFIT" or not "SMART" enough. I mean take our USA presidents...were they straight A students. (Continued…)
John Jr.
posted 4/09/09 @ 8:51 AM CST
Tracy, first off unpatiotic?? Just kidding I know what you were meaning to write. However why is questioning someone who still refuses to present their original birth certificate unpatriotic? To me trying to retain the standards established by our forefathers is very patriotic. (Continued…)
mike
posted 4/09/09 @ 10:16 AM CST
Tracy. Talking about patriotism you were one of the many people criticizing President Bush? If so you were unpatriotic. Could this be a time where it's only wrong when it's my guy being Criticized?
Stephanie
posted 4/09/09 @ 6:59 PM CST
First off I would like to say that Tony and Nick are both dedicated representatives for the students on this campus. The issues they stand by and trust in are in the best interest of our campus as a whole. (Continued…)
Post a Comment