The latest winners of the 2004 Georgetown University Student Association election are Kelley Hampton and Luis Torres, but this may change on Sunday. The Election Commission will finally consider runners-up Adam Giblin and Eric Lashner’s appeal, originally placed the day after the election.
Hampton and Torres were disqualified from the election for exceeding the $75 budget allotted for candidates. After the disqualification, Giblin and Lashner were declared the winners.
Hampton and Torres filed their appeal several weeks after the election. On Saturday, the Council announced its decision to overturn the fines imposed on Torres and Hampton and declared them the winners. The reversed fines concerned improper use of e-mail and University property, as well as the campaign’s insertion of flyers inside copies of the Hoya, which had endorsed Giblin and Lashner.
However, Giblin and Lashner appealed several alleged Hampton and Torres violations that were not fined the day after the election. According to Giblin, Hampton and Torres were not fined for the illegal use of club office equipment, nor were they fined to the full extent of their illegal use of e-mails.
“We think the Election Commission was too lenient,” Lashner said. “We found out about some flagrant violations of the bylaws, but in the interest of the students decided that since Torres and Hampton were already disqualified there was no need to make these claims public.”
Originally, Torres and Hampton were only fined for one e-mail, because they only had the body of one e-mail as evidence. “Now they have scores of bodies of e-mails that were sent illegally,” said Giblin. “We are confident that if the Election Commission hears our appeal, they won’t rule against us.”
Giblin and Lashner are not the only ones upset about the Constitutional Council’s ruling. “I don’t think the council was very impartial,” said Hoya Editor-in-Chief Josh Zumbrun, who testified in the appeal process. An editorial in Tuesday’s Hoya suggested that the constitutional council arrived at its decision because of its relationship to secret societies on campus.
Zumbrun said that the insertion of flyers into the paper constitutes theft of advertising and a violation of copyright laws, as well as a violation of rules against theft and disruption in the Student Code of Conduct. “A crime was committed against the paper,” he said.
Zumbrun said that the Hoya will not be taking legal action against Hampton and Torres, but he declined to comment on his plans within the University justice system. He did note that he will not take action to change the outcome of the election.
Current GUSA president Brian Morgenstern said the situation is unfortunate because it further delays the transition period. However, he said he understands Lashner’s decision to appeal. “This will be addressing issues that have not yet been addressed. This is all new information, so it is necessary,” said Morgenstern.
Hampton, however, was surprised at the appeal. “I didn’t think they would do something else … we respect that they are appealing, but we don’t think it is in the best interest of the students.”
Despite all the controversy, students seem to be untouched. “I don’t quite understand what’s going on with GUSA right now, and I don’t really care, because I don’t know what they do anyways,” Courtney Burton (CAS ‘06) said.
Hampton hopes that this situation will lead to changes in the election process. “It is all a question of the system in the end. There is going to be election reform next year, because this can’t happen again,” she said.
