Fix my DSG

Today, elections are being held for Duke Student Government committee vice presidents, senators and class offices. Yet, many of these elections are either uncontested or lack candidates entirely. Though a dip in interest is not unusual for Spring semester elections, we find this dip to be a disturbing bellwether for next year’s DSG representatives. Last year, five of the seven vice presidential races were contested. The year before, thirteen people ran for those same positions. We take issue with the lack of candidates running and believe it to be a symptom of the external perception problems and internal dysfunction of DSG.

First, we note that, for many minority students, the first means for institutional change that come to mind are cultural organizations and advocacy groups, not DSG. DSG should work on its group partnerships to create inroads to participation, thereby shifting from its current underrepresentation of minority students. DSG also has a reputation for taking up projects students have little interest in. Although this is not true of every committee matter, DSG forecasts of student interests tend to miss the mark. Zagster is a prime example of a service that passes the “nod test” within the senate—nobody can really loathe increased bike access—despite the lack of assurance that the actual usage of the service lives up to the forecast and dollars being spent on it.

A second area for improvement is DSG’s internal function. A frequent complaint by prospective candidates is that the Wednesday night senate meetings drag on for exorbitant amounts of time. This is perhaps the largest, most glaring symptom of an ineffective prioritization of issues. Thus, we continue to emphasize the potential for DSGRU, as it was designed to give DSG a better attention span. DSG should emulate Fix My Campus’ blend of student input and project progress feedback on its Facebook page. In real elected offices, politicians are held responsible to their constituents, whereas, in DSG, there is virtually no meaningful accountability for student leaders.

Ultimately, we see DSG being most effective as a bridge between administrators and students. Organizations like the Duke University Union, the Center for Multicultural Affairs and the Center for Sexual and Gender Diversity exist to provide for social programming, activism and other student interests, and DSG’s work should focus upon capitalizing on its relationship with the administration to promote these interests and to find ways it can uniquely improve student life. Much of DSG’s strength comes from its institutional knowledge. DSG ideally knows best which ideas have been tried in the past and for what reasons they have, or have not, worked as well as what the administration is currently up to. One of DSG's foremost communicative duties, therefore, is to convey the “state of the University” to students. There should also be more ways for students to get involved without becoming a part of the huge bureaucratic system. Perhaps the introduction of more task forces or more opportunities for students and student groups to be represented within various administrative and DSG committees ought to be considered.

At a time when it seems like interest in DSG is waning, we urge the new members of the organization to continue to strive to make it relevant to each of our Duke experiences.