Editorials Applause for transparency

Author: [no author name found]

The Student Government Association (SGA) should be commended for insisting on transparency in the counting of electoral votes. The published final vote count, though released more than a week after the election, lends an enhanced degree of legitimacy to the positions of elected SGA President and Student Co-Chair of Community Council. Alex Stanton and Annie Williams, both '07, can now begin preparation for the upcoming year knowing that Middlebury students truly stand behinds their platforms. The release of numbers is a fitting start for Stanton, who in fact captured 60 percent of all votes in the presidential election and prioritized transparency in governmental organizations while campaigning.

Because the former justification for keeping the tally a secret was respect for the losing candidates, the support of former presidential candidate Alina Levina '09 was key in finalizing the release. Dean of Student Affairs Ann Hanson pointed out that in past years candidates have received as few as five votes. Levina, though collecting sufficiently more votes than this all-time low, should be praised for her desire to know the final count with a view toward reforming her platform for the future.

The SGA should make sure the release of the numbers is consistent policy in future years. If they take the elections seriously at all, future candidates should be able to face the facts once the votes have been tallied.

A less positive facet of the released numbers is the large number of votes to abstain - 248 in the presidential race and 320 in the SCCOCC. These votes are frankly disappointing and are counterproductive - if students are truly dissatisfied with the SGA, a more effective recourse than making a symbolic vote of disapproval is to become involved in the organization themselves.



A right to know



In light of charges pressed upon members of the Duke University lacrosse team, which have resulted in much chaos on campus and hyped-up media coverage but no resolution as of yet, a cautious approach to disseminating information about Middlebury's own sexual assault case is understandable.

However, in a well-intentioned effort to protect the privacy of those involved, the administration seems to have eliminated any potential communication with the student body about the incident.

The idea of encouraging the community to be tight-lipped in an attempt to squelch rumors surrounding the allegations is inherently counterproductive. In a small environment like Middlebury, excessive confidentiality often breeds curiosity and misguided speculation.

Because the case is so sensitive, Old Chapel was initially in the right to avoid the traditional all-campus e-mail approach to communication when the severity of the allegations first became known.

By publishing the date, location and disposition of the reported sexual assaults in the Public Safety Log the same week the alleged rapes were reported and releasing an annual crime report, the College has ensured its adherence to the 1986 Clery Act. The federal legislation named in memory of rape and murder victim and Lehigh University student Jane Clery requires colleges and universities to disclose information about crimes on their campuses in a timely manner with the goal of increasing awareness of potential risks.

As the investigations progress on and off campus and the circumstances surrounding the alleged sexual assaults presumably grow clearer, the College should strive to circulate as much relevant, accurate information as possible about the allegations keeping the spirit of the Clery Act in mind. This information should be supplemented by basic information detailing the resources available to rape victims and the College's own recently revised sexual assault policy.

Conveying accurate information that can dispel rampant rumors would be much more productive than promoting secrecy and thereby adding fuel to the speculative fire.