Dear Editors,

I was, and still am, surprised by

theoutcome of therecent student body
presidential election. Itseems likeever
sinceI first arrived at Principia, I have
been bombarded by flyers, Facebook
pages, and emails encouraging me to
advocate some progressive social cause
on campus. However, I, unlike most
of the student body, was (and remain)
satisfied with the policies currently
in effect at Principia, and therefore I
had no intention of actively pursuing
change.
Throughout the course of the
current school year, the explosively
controversial homosexual policy has
been the principal topic of discussion,
inspiring alumni on both sides of the
issue to send letters to the Principia
administration voicing their opinions
on the issue. The administration held
two weeks' worth of private discussions
about the policy with concerned
members of the Principia community
In an attempt to eliminate any
confusion regarding what the policy
actually states or why the policy exists.
Most recently, a student-organized
sit-in took place for several days in
protest of the homosexuality policy.
Needless to say,this iswithout question
the most frequently discussed topic on
the Principia campus as evidenced by
student activism aimed at reversing
the policy, a recent Pilot poll that
revealed the homosexuality policy to
be the most important issue in students'
~ opinion, and the ceaseless discussion
01 surrounding thepolicy.
~ The same Pilot poll also
~ revealed that only 29% of students
'i thought that the current study body
~ government supported them in
t addressing pressing issues on campus.
::I With such a remarkable degree of
-;; discontent present in the student
~ body, two students, Briggs DeLoach
. 5 and Shirley Moihloe, decided to
challenge current study body president,
Christine Nacewicz, for the role of
president. Both challengers promoted
similar platforms that took a hardline
approach against the homosexuality
policy, and each candidate promised to
help bridge the divide between foreign
and domestic students. During the
Candidate Night discussion, DeLoach
and Moihloe delivered cogent rhetoric
advocating the need for change and
how each would attempt to effect that
change on campus. Both DeLoach
and Moihloe appeared passionate and
confident as they addressed audience
questions and held firmly to their
strong opinions. Conversely, Nacewicz,
the least progressive of the three
candidates, seemed unprepared and
uncomfortable throughout the night,
even trying to dodge aquestion at one
point. She failed to take a hard stance
on any issue, taking the time to remind
the audience that she did not oppose
the homosexuality policy, nor was
she opposed to change. Based on the
evening's events, I thoroughly believed
that Nacewicz had effectively taken
herself out of the race.
When the results of the election
werepublished declaring Nacewicz the
winner, I was shocked and perplexed.
Principia harbors a progressive,
liberal, student body, and those same
students had apparently momentarily
repudiated their dissatisfaction withthe
homosexuality policy and the current
student body government while filling
out their ballots. Based on my own
observations, Pilot articles, and Pilot
polls, most students seem to be either
generally displeased with Principia's
policies or they have at least one issue
that they are passionate about. It did
not make sense that the one candidate
who was not actively pursuing change
would bereelected.
The voting process itself was
also a bit strange. The ballot was
constructed insuchaway that thethree
Letter to the Editor
candidates' names were not aligned in
a single column or row, and it was not
entirely clear how to indicate one's
vote. The lack of privacy while voting
was also disturbing, especially since a
presidential candidate was staring over
my shoulder watching mevote. Also, it
did not appear as though the various
students who took turns monitoring the
ballot box had anywayof knowingwho
had voted. I did not see anyone cross
myname off of alist, mark thebacksof
my hands with aSharpie, or otherwise
indicate that I had voted. The voting
process was disorganized and there was
no way to prevent anyone from voting
multiple times, asillustrated by thefact
that I wasaskedtovotenumerous times
throughout the day even though I had
already voted. Occasionally, the ballot
box was swamped 'with voters, and
there is no possible way that the one
or two students monitoring the process
could know who had or hadn't voted.
This problem of not knowing who had
already voted was further magnified
by the fact that students monitoring
the ballot box were rotating inand out
throughout theday.
I don't mean to suggest that there
was widespread voter fraud or that
Nacewicz won the election because
someone stuffed the ballot box. I only
wish to acknowledge the fact that the
process was not conducted in a way
as to effectively prevent voter fraud.
Principia Policy 16 declares, "The
government of The Principia shall
be as democratic as possible," and
compromising the integrity of an
individual's vote does not lend itself to
Principia's ideaof democracy.
Pat White
2013 April PILOT 07