Will Hix '12, who announced his intentions to run for student body president last week, proposed the amendment in response to EPAC ruling that barred students who previously have been suspended from the College from running for the positions of student body president or vice president. The amendment would have created only limited eligibility standards, requiring that candidates be rising sophomores, juniors or seniors and in residence "near the College" for the Fall, Winter and Spring terms following the election.
In his opening statement to the Assembly, Hix said allowing EPAC to rule on candidate eligibility "upsets the distribution of powers," and that EPAC has overstepped its authority. EPAC an appointed five-person advisory committee should have been required to submit a recommendation to the Assembly to change eligibility requirements through a two-thirds vote rather than making the decision unilaterally, Hix said.
Harry Enten '11, the chairman of EPAC, said in the meeting that EPAC is not breaking with precedent in making rulings on eligibility, and the recently-passed measure barring previously-suspended students had been considered in past years. This year was the first time that this measure passed in a 3-2 decision, according to Enten, who cast the tie-breaking vote.
Although Enten said he could not comment on why the other two EPAC members voted for the change in rulings, he believes that students who have been suspended from the College cannot effectively represent the school as student body president or vice president.
"While the administration does a fairly good job of maintaining who has been suspended in the past and who hasn't been, the ultimate rumors do leak out," Enten said. "We hear about it even if we're not supposed to."
Enten said in an interview with The Dartmouth that the amendment sets a "very dangerous precedent" that puts EPAC in the "precarious" position that any of its rulings can be challenged by the Assembly, undermining EPAC's purpose as an independent body.
The proposed amendment is more motivated by its affects on certain candidates than by its limitations on EPAC's authority, Enten said.
"My personal belief is that it has more to do with the barring of a particular individual to run than the rule itself or the way that the rule was passed," he said.
The majority of students who chose to speak at the meeting spoke in favor of the amendment.
Abby Yazbak '14 said that it is unfair for potential candidates to be subject to rules that EPAC can change on a yearly basis, while Steven Avila '11 expressed concern over the precedent that EPAC's eligibility requirements would set.
Other students, including current Student Body President Eric Tanner '11, were opposed to the amendment. Tanner said EPAC has the authority to rule on candidate eligibility, and that the College administration not the Assembly has the authority to overturn EPAC's rulings.
David Becker '13 said the Assembly is a "politicized body," unlike EPAC, which is removed from the process and therefore better equipped to determine questions of eligibility.
In an interview with The Dartmouth, Hix challenged the Assembly's vote, saying that the count was inaccurate. While the vote was declared to be 13-9 against the amendment at the conclusion of the meeting, the final ballot read 17-8 against the amendment, according to an email sent from Tanner to Hix after the meeting and obtained by The Dartmouth.
Tanner voted against the bill, despite restrictions in the Assembly's Constitution prohibiting the president from voting except in cases of a tiebreaker.
Philippa Martinez-Berrier '14 said her vote in favor of the amendment had been incorrectly counted as a vote against the amendment in an email sent to Hix and obtained by The Dartmouth.
While Hix acknowledged that correcting these errors would still have defeated the bill, the entire voting process was the "antithesis of an open democracy," he said. According to Hix's analysis, members of the Class of 2014 made up 15 of the 25 voting members present, and contributed 12 of the votes against the amendment. Out of the 10 upperclassmen present, seven voted in favor of the amendment's passage.
Hix said he will continue to work to overturn EPAC's ruling by approaching the College's administration, exploring legal arguments about privacy concerns regarding students' disciplinary histories and petitioning EPAC directly to reconsider their decision.
Hix, who has been an Assembly member since his freshman year, said he will continue to gather the signatures necessary for his petition to run for president.