« Virginia Gov: Kilgore Edging Kaine | Home | Beneath the rule of men entirely great… »

Monday, October 24, 2005

Get Out The Vote

A reader, presumably a Dartmouth alum, e-mails:

I wonder what you think about the influence on the election of the Dartmouth alumni that live in the Hanover environs and in Upper Valley? Their political profile is arch liberal Democrat. Was this segment decisive?

I think that segment and the Boston contingent were decisive. With only 350 or so votes, the election was easily swung, and those most in a position to be at Dartmouth tooling around from 11a-3p on a Sunday afternoon tended to be those who live in New England. And the “arch liberal Democrat” descriptor is not an undue generalization. For those who (wrongly) see these elections as Republican v. Democrat, as so many seem to, New Englanders can be relied upon to vote for the non-petition candidates by the logic that, because the petitioners are firmly anti-establishment, and the establishment is decidedly left-of-center, they must be Republicans and therefore must be wrong. Ridiculous, but that is the sort of tripe I’m hearing.

But the electorate yesterday was only 0.73% of alumni. There is simply no excuse for not allowing all alumni to vote via the internet. The technology is in place and the tabulation systems are nearly flawless. The petitioners ran on a platform that included striking all language that would require presence in Hanover, New Hampshire in order to vote. What we saw yesterday, I think, were the old rules working exactly as intended.

MORE: David Gale, class of 2000 (Would that be class of ‘oh’? David suggests ‘zeros’!) sends me a copy of his e-mail to the newly elected Executive Committee of the Alumni Association. His missive, as well as meetings I’ve had with some alumni “insiders”, has given me insight into what happened at this meeting, since my attendance and that of any student or professional media was not permitted. David writes in part:

In today’s high-paced, highly-interconnected world, it’s simply beyond belief that we require alumni to travel to Hanover in order to elect the leaders of the Association—our fellow alumni are spread around the world, in a large variety of roles and responsibilities, many of which do not provide for the extensive time-off and travel (not to mention the related expenses) to return to our beloved Hanover. I am lucky in that I have remained relatively local, living but twentyfive minutes’ drive from campus, but even so my wife—a Dartmouth ‘02—was unable to attend yesterday’s meeting, as she had to stay home with our baby. Thus, although my wife and I both feel strongly about the importance of continuing Dartmouth’s greatness, and especially the importance of the Alumni in that continuance, only one of us was able to vote. Many other alumni were unable to vote at all.

Again, yesterday, many people on all sides expressed frustration with the lack of all-media voting for the Executive Committee—and many, many others were unable to express their frustration because they couldn’t return to Hanover. The Executive Committee can ensure that all future elections are inclusive of those who, for whatever reason, can not place their votes in person, without a constitutional ammendment. Yesterday, many of the nominees expressed their support for this. The only question remains—will the new Executive Committee live up to that ideal, or were their promises of yesterday mere lip-service? I hereby call upon the newly elected to reaffirm their commitment to fairness and democracy by establishing all-media voting for the Executive Committee immediately.

[Emphasis mine.]

UPDATE: Even more reaction here.

Posted on October 24, 2005 10:19 AM. Permalink