Although Student Assembly elections begin today, students' apparent ignorance of and apathy toward the election process demonstrate the hazards of an inadequate campaign period.
At the end of a campaign week characterized by a lack of debate and a small number of poorly publicized candidates, voter turnout will fall short of previous years. Low voter participation in the elections will deprive the new Assembly executives of true mandates and reduce any claim they might have to real student representation.
In addition, such disappointing pre-election activity makes it difficult for voters to extract the key issues from the candidates' nebulous platforms.
However, in the vice presidential race, Case Dorkey's experience and dedication, his concrete ideas for improving the Assembly and his understanding of both the student body and the administration all clearly recommend him for the job.
His ideas to reopen the Hovey Grill and increase funding for the Undergraduate Finance Committee are attainable goals that appeal to students.
In addition, Dorkey's openness to input from diverse sections of the student population reinforces his ability to represent students better than anyone else on the ballot.
Although Rob Auten presents a more realistic platform than his unofficial running-mate Dan Powell, he lacks both experience and a serious commitment to the future of the Assembly.
Given the lack of debate among the presidential candidates this year, it is difficult to determine who would make the best president.
While Dan Powell's bid for the presidency has provided some comic relief from Assembly politics as usual, it is impossible to seriously consider his platform as a viable option.
Although neither Josh Green nor Dan Rygorsky has demonstrated the power to unite the student body, both have much to offer as potential Assembly presidents.
However, Rygorsky has articulated clear-cut goals, such as more parking options for students and cable service to dormitory rooms, which he hopes will lead the Assembly away from its current broad objectives to a more student service-oriented focus.
While Green's experience and his multitude of ideas are commendable, students are hungry for an Assembly which delivers results rather than dead-end discussion. In addition, it is questionable whether Green could accomplish all of his plans while effectively delegating responsibilities.
While Rygorsky has been less involved in the Assembly than Green, he understands the student service issues that are important on campus. Such a focus, reminiscent of the Jon Heavey era, could put the Assembly back on track.
Despite the weak nature of this year's campaigns, Dorkey and Rygorsky emerge as the best choices to lead a productive and representative Assembly next year.