Dartblog

Some members of the Executive Committee of my class are circulating a note in support of my opponents in the upcoming Alumni Trustee election. Its content gives a good sense of where governance at Dartmouth might be headed:

Both candidates were selected by the Dartmouth Alumni Council’s Nominating and Alumni Search Committee in a thorough review of dozens of qualified candidates. We believe in this method of candidate selection since it gives dedicated alumni from diverse backgrounds ample opportunity to assess the abilities of candidates to both add compelling value to the existing Board of Trustees and effectively work with the existing Trustees and President.

This election is important as it provides us with an opportunity to break from the divisive political process that has characterized our most recent elections. The new Association of Alumni rules that establish the election process for Dartmouth’s alumni trustee elections now permit the Alumni Council to nominate only one candidate for each open seat. [emphasis added]

Do you believe in this method of candidate selection, too? The Alumni Council’s Nominating and Alumni Search Committee is made up of only seven or eight people, plus the Chairman of the Board of Trustees, who is an ex officio member of the committee. This small committee interviews and chooses candidates for the Board, and then these candidates are presented — without prior identification or opportunity for review — to the Alumni Council for a ratification vote, which takes place immediately (and is almost always unanimous; this year one Councillor out of 90 dissented).

It appears that my classmates feel that the best way to “break from the divisive political process that has characterized our most recent elections” is to dispense with elections altogether. They want to let their little committee choose a single candidate for each open Trustee seat, have that candidate summarily approved by the Council, and avoid any discussion with those 69,000 pesky alumni out there who might have other ideas.

If I recall correctly, in the last century there were a good many nations that tried this kind of thing in their national politics, but very few of them do so today.