Stephen Smith '88 has won a seat on the Board of Trustees of Dartmouth College. The College's website reports that Smith took home 55% of the vote—Dartblog reminds us that that's a new high, topping T.J. Rodgers '70 54% from 2004. Voter participation was also historically high with 28 % of alumni taking the time to vote; 37% voted in the recent constitutional referendum, and 25% have taken part in the most recent trustee elections. I talked to Smith around a month about various issues, take a look at that article for an overview of what problems he believes the College is currently facing.
Smith is the fourth straight petition candidate elected in the last three trustee races. Alumni dissatisfaction with the direction the College is taking is palpable. Over at DartWire Ned Kenney '10 argued that if Smith won, it would only be because of Wright's entry into campus politics in the fall— because of Wright's intervention, so the argument goes, the issue of free speech was again in the spotlight. I agreed with him, making the same argument myself to several people, but with Smith winning so convincingly it appears that this would be the wrong conclusion to draw. It is more likely, it now seems, that dissatisfaction with the administration is broad in its scope, making this election all the more important as rumours of President Wright stepping down in a few years circulate Hanover.
Dartmouth's Board of Trustees is unique in that nearly half of its members are voted onto the Board by alumni. The Board currently consists of 18 trustees, 8 elected, 8 appointed, as well as two additional members, namely, the Governor of New Hampshire and the President of the College. In 2003, the Board voted to slowly expand to 22 from the current 18. As it stands after the current election, 4 of the 18 Trustees were petition candidates.
For more reading, here is William F. Buckley Jr.'s biographical sketch/endorsement of Smith.
Once the percentage of votes the other candidates received is made known, I will post them here.
Here are some numbers:
18,186 voters
32,941 votes cast (Dartmouth uses an approval voting system)
9,984 votes cast for Smith
UPDATE: I've been informed by Roland Adams, the administration's press secretary, that the percentage of votes received by the other candidates will not be made public. This is standard practice.
CORRECTION: In 2003 the Board of Trustees voted to expand from 16 trustees to 22. The current size of the board is 18 trustees (ex officio members included).
Thursday, May 17, 2007
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
13 comments:
How long, do you think, it will be before someone complains that Smith shouldn't have won because he only got 30.3% of the votes cast?
Anfin,
As you'll see in my most recent post over on DartWire, I certainly agree that there is enough alumni dissatisfaction to elect a petition candidate, even in years when there is not a fiasco such as the one we encountered last fall. I'm taking exception to Smith in particular, who by no means deserves to be a Trustee. He had nothing to do with the College for close to two decades and then all of a sudden, he's distraught by what's happening to Dear Ol' Dartmouth? It's funny to ignore the institution to which you say you owe all of your success. I know that you, as a Reviewer, could never agree with this in public (prove me wrong!) but Smith is an opportunist. I stand by my claim that he easily could have lost the election had there not been so many developments keeping the spotlight off of his indefensible hypocrisy.
Saying that Smith is undeserving of his post and being upset that he was elected do not go hand in hand. I think it's great he pulled it off. It's another step in the right direction, for sure.
Anonymous: I'm not sure you understand approval voting. One person can vote for multiple candidates. So Smith's 55% probably means he wasn't the first choice of more than half of the electorate—but he was *acceptable* to more than half.
Smith was "acceptable" to far more alumni than any other candidate. It is highly unlikely that more people had another candidate as their first choice, yet that candidate was found totally unacceptable by enough others to give Smith the edge.
A. S.:
Oh, I understand it. But one of the standard attacks during the AGTF brouhaha was that the petition candidates had been elected with a mere 20-30% of the votes cast (ignoring the percentage of voters who voted for them). I'm wondering how soon someone's going to make the same illogical complaint about this election.
Are you sure the board info is right?
I thought it expanded from 16 to 22 [not 18 to 22], and that Zywicki and Robinson represent the first two "new" seats.
And the board is not strictly unique in how it lets alumni nominate new trustees, since it is based on the system that was used at Williams and is probably still used there. But it is unique in the energy it puts into the process.
The Board has 16 regular members and 2 ex officio members, one of whom, the Governor of New Hamphshire, never votes. This means the President of the College acts, in effect, as a tie-breaker. You could be right about the Board already having started its expansion, but I've never seen anything to make me think that it's already under way.
The board had 16 [plus 2 ex officio] until it has started expanding, which is why it now has 18 [plus 2]. The two new seats recently created out of the blue are held by Zywicki and someone else [I don't remember]. The former obviously is the Alumni Trustee, the latter the Charter Trustee.
That makes presently 8 Alumni Trustees and 8 Charter Trustees, you might say, although the 2 Ex Officio are just as much required to exist by the charter, and both are permitted to vote [although the Governor understandably makes a practice of not coming to meetings].
You will note that the expansion reduces the relative power of the ex officio trustees from the original 1:6 in the charter to a future 1:11, and it increases the relative power of alumni nominees from 5:12 to 5:11 [both worse if you discount the governor].
Perhaps the trustees should avoid taking an alumni nominee in the future in order to return this imbalance to its historic proportions.
Anonymous, was it really a standard attack during the constitution campaign that trustees were nominated by a minority of votes?
I doubt it was, because the proposed constitution also required approval voting.
A.S., thanks for the 16-18 correction. We'll give you a bye on the Brit spelling of "rumours."
Thanks too for restarting comments on Dartlog. This site seems to be the place for discussions that have been happening in Joe's inbox or on Little Green Blog or whatever until now.
I'm afraid you'll have to excuse the rumour/rumor mistake many more times in the future. It seems to me that Penguin and Oxford translations are more readily available than American ones—that coupled with The Economist, and I find my reading tastes most often lead to british spelling.
We're glad to get the blog up and running again, thanks for reading!
I got to play Assassin's Creed which kind of disappointed me. There is some great work in there, great work. The art is fantastic...the levels in that game are huge. The free running things works really well and feels wow power leveling great to control, though after awhile the joy and awe kind of wares off. I hated the story...the whole setting kind of frustrated me. I was so completely looking forward to playing as an assassin during the Crusades. When I first heard the wow powerleveling concept for the game and awe the screenshots I was pretty jazzed. That excitement was quickly smothered when I found out I was a descendant of Altair and I was in a simulation. Great...a game within a game. That really kind of spoiled the whole thing for me. I played about halfway through the game before I completely stopped. I think the wow gold sequel that is inevitably going to get made will be pretty good...though I think they have kind f locked themselves into the whole genetic memory story thread. There is some really great stuff in that game, but the story, and combat really kind of killed it for me. The combat is still not that great of an improvement over the POP stuff. It is decent, but it feels like it could be so much better if they would just give the power leveling player more control over the character.
A片,aio,av女優,av,av片,aio交友愛情館,ut聊天室,聊天室,豆豆聊天室,色情聊天室,尋夢園聊天室,080聊天室,視訊聊天室,080苗栗人聊天室,上班族聊天室,成人聊天室,中部人聊天室,一夜情聊天室,情色聊天室,情色視訊,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,視訊,免費視訊,美女交友,成人交友,聊天室交友,微風論壇,微風成人,sex,成人,情色,情色貼圖,色情,微風,聊天室尋夢園,交友,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊辣妹,一夜情
情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣用品,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,情趣,按摩棒,跳蛋,充氣娃娃,情境坊歡愉用品,情趣用品,情人節禮物,情惑用品性易購,A片,視訊聊天室
免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情色交友,免費AV,色情網站,辣妹視訊,美女交友,色情影片,成人影片,成人網站,A片,H漫,18成人,成人圖片,成人漫畫,情色網,日本A片,免費A片下載,性愛
A片,色情,成人,做愛,情色文學,A片下載,色情遊戲,色情影片,色情聊天室,情色電影,免費視訊,免費視訊聊天,免費視訊聊天室,一葉情貼圖片區,情色,情色視訊,免費成人影片,視訊交友,視訊聊天,視訊聊天室,言情小說,愛情小說,AIO,AV片,A漫,av dvd,聊天室,自拍,情色論壇,視訊美女,AV成人網,色情A片,SEX
情趣用品,A片,免費A片,AV女優,美女視訊,情趣用品,A片,免費A片,日本A片,A片下載,線上A片,成人電影,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,微風成人區,成人文章,成人影城,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊色情網站,一葉情貼圖片區,做愛,性愛,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,美女交友,做愛影片
av,情趣用品,a片,成人電影,微風成人,嘟嘟成人網,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人圖片,18成人,成人小說,成人圖片區,,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,情色電影,aio,av女優,AV,免費A片,日本a片,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,聊天室
情趣用品.A片,情色,情色貼圖,色情聊天室,情色視訊,情色文學,色情小說,情色小說,色情,寄情築園小遊戲,情色電影,色情遊戲,色情網站,聊天室,ut聊天室,豆豆聊天室,美女視訊,辣妹視訊,視訊聊天室,視訊交友網,免費視訊聊天,免費A片,av女優,av,成人電影,成人,成人貼圖,成人交友,成人網站,自拍,尋夢園聊天室
Post a Comment