Home » News » Gazette editors take candidates to task

Gazette editors take candidates to task

Everyone has an opinion during election time — us included. Three of the Gazette‘s most opinionated editors — sports editor Arden Zwelling, news and web editor Stuart A. Thompson and senior editor Mike Hayes — have been following every step of the campaign since day one. They sat down on Monday to discuss each individual candidate and their platform. Here’s where they stand.

Marshall Goldfarb

Marshall Goldfarb’s platform boils down to a wish list of populist ideas designed to win votes. We’re hoping most voters will see past the glossy coat of populism to the giant piles of garbage that lie beneath.

The $3 meal is an incredibly inane idea. According to the numbers in a break-even analysis provided by Goldfarb himself, he would have to sell 1,000 meals a week just to break even. Reaching that plateau is about as probable as a women’s issues primer in Student Magazine. Not to mention the fact this endeavour will drive business away from the USC’s cash-strapped Spoke and Wave.

Furthermore, Goldfarb’s proposal to disperse tickets for athletic events will not only be valueless to students — who already get into Mustang games for free — but also unnecessarily wasteful. The actual design, printing, cutting and distribution of these tickets will be a monumental project to undertake for a glorified flyer.

Expanding HYPE and reorganizing it into a promotional operation is a noble idea — HYPE would be more useful to the USC as a promotional vehicle. However, Goldfarb underestimates the sheer human resources and financial clout required to pull this off. The increased cost of promotions will force Goldfarb to implement cover charges and hike up drink prices, which will almost certainly discourage students from attending his on-campus events.

Matt Hyland

Hyland’s platform is a smorgasbord of tidbits thrown together in an attempt to speak to as many different student issues as possible. Nothing revolutionary in other words.

Many of Hyland’s platform points bear a remarkable resemblance to other platforms in the past. If you’re going to copy other people’s suggestions, it’s a good idea to make sure they’re worth pursuing.

Hyland’s decision to consult only select “key stakeholders” when writing his platform costs him a lot, as several of his major points are already being taken care of by this year’s USC board, especially the grocery store — which the vice-president finance is already negotiating a potential agreement on.

In an effort to avoid the appearance of bias, we won’t delve too much into the whole “e-Gazette” concept, other than to say such decisions come under the purview of our internal management.

The “rebranding” of USC services, in principle, is a good idea. The USC could use a wider public profile when it comes to retail operations like the Wave or Mustang Alley.

However, the vague term “rebranding” could mean a whole lot when applied to services like Pride Western or the Women’s Issues Network — especially when both groups have shown a desire to remain distinct from the broader USC.

Ultimately, Hyland’s platform is a classic case of overreaching. He fails to provide concrete solutions to retail services and clubs, which instead we are promised will be “reviewed” or “analyzed.”

Mike Tithecott

Mike Tithecott impressed us with his honesty. Saying he isn’t prepared for this job and admitting much of his platform is borrowed from previous candidates is commendable.

Not presenting solutions to the USC’s biggest issues is not. Proposing a review committee to investigate USC retail operations is a roundabout way of saying “I don’t really know how to solve this problem.”

Laptop sharing is a grandiose, expensive idea. Costs associated with this are astronomical, including warranties, managing the rentals and risk of theft or damage. Since the program would last several years, he’s passing costs to future boards who must maintain the program or drop it all together. All for something already offered at dozens of computer labs around campus.

Most of Tithecott’s ideas are small and insignificant, like upgrading UCC bathrooms with two-ply toilet paper.

While his “Key to Western” idea would provide a lot of information missing from the USC website, Tithecott could achieve this along with 90 per cent of his platform in the first week. But what happens after that?

When pressed about a lack of vision for USC finances, Tithecott listed a few good ideas that were suspiciously missing from his campaign. If he really understood the USC’s key problems, why would he keep solutions off the platform?

Ultimately, Tithecott has all of Goldfarb’s blind populism — he just coats it with a little more charisma.

Ray Park

Like a hamster, Ray Park’s platform is small, fuzzy, and mostly harmless. Coming in as the shortest of this year’s batch of candidates, Park’s vague and insubstantial platform tops out the buzzword count before even getting past the title.

“Bringing Western Together & Embracing Diversity Closing the Gap: USC and Students Being Reliable and Beneficial to Students” is so incomprehensible, we wish we thought of it, since it’s comedic gold.

One of the more interesting things about Park’s platform is how it actually got worse over the course of the campaign. When it started, it contained no mention of “Opt-out Dental Coverage” for the USC health plan. This suggestion is nothing new, and students have voted down this costly opt-out a total of three times in past years.

You could say Park’s other platform points are at least easily attainable — and we definitely agree. They’re so attainable that Emily Rowe could likely complete them before she finishes reading this article. If Park’s goal was to counter Hyland’s platform, “Aim Higher,” mission accomplished — nothing aims lower than this.

Jeff Rutledge

Rutledge is the only candidate to adequately address the club system, providing well-researched improvements like stronger financial training, which goes far beyond the vague generalities of his opponents. Since the USC has struggled to correct club finances for a few years now, he should be careful to make this a lasting program and not simply a handout on best practices.

Having debit and credit at the Spoke would be great — but he fails to mention in his platform that costs would be passed on to students at about $0.25 to $0.35 per transaction.

His suggestion to bring in a printing press is by far the most unfeasible point on anyone’s platform. Printing houses exist at the most elite school’s in the world, not Western. Can we print money too?

The Purple Bike rental program is great for the environment and for students, which is probably why this is already in place at Western and almost ready to launch.

His Purple Hub is a sensible idea to turn the website into a service where students can sell textbooks and co-ordinate rides. Combining calendars for faculty councils with a central USC calendar would help in overall promotion and it’s surprising this hasn’t already happened.

Ultimately, Rutledge’s platform is a few shining stars inside one giant black hole: he fails to even mention the USC’s retail operations, which are bleeding money, and offers no solutions to fix USC finances.

Matthijs van Gaalen

As far as platforms go, it doesn’t get any more risky or sweeping than Matthijs van Gaalen’s, which addresses big picture ideas — not T-shirts or toilet paper.

While the chances of his lobbying being successful are slim, van Gaalen’s academic advocacy is a fresh and innovative idea that separates him from the pack — no other candidate explores how the USC can influence academic policy.

His pass/fail interest credit idea might inspire students to learn about subjects outside their primary studies, thus encouraging a more diverse and vibrant campus. It is refreshing to see a candidate who is interested in lobbying for pedagogical causes.

Van Gaalen deserves praise for presenting a directional shift for the USC; however, convincing administration to apply these changes will be an up-hill and most likely fruitless struggle.

He has also hurt his cause by not focusing on more tangible points that are relatable to the average student. Van Gaalen should have augmented his big picture ideas with more concrete changes and improvements to student life. A new website and promoting environmentalism are pedestrian ideas.

Furthermore, van Gaalen’s welcome week for upper-year students is an extraordinarily trivial idea. Most upper-years — who live off campus and are already familiar with campus and London — will be going to Richmond Row during the first week of school — not wet/dry programming on campus.

Follow the Gazette on Facebook and Twitter.