Apathetic non-voters forfeit right to complain about the SGA
Reporting about the SGA, not a record of it: The Johns Hopkins News-Letter published this and the SGA did not write it, file it, or approve it. The archive holds it because the article itself uses the phrases “sga” and “student government”.
Summary
- This Johns Hopkins News-Letter article covers low participation in SGA elections and the article’s argument that students should become more involved.
- The News-Letter reported that 1,456 students voted in the SGA presidential election, while fewer than 600 students from each class voted in the later Class Council elections.
- The paper reported that the SGA stopped uploading meeting minutes for several months after losing its website password, and resumed only after students criticized the delay.
- The article adds that recent campaign videos often used humor and sarcasm instead of specific plans for improving the university.
- The reporter writes that greater student involvement could lead candidates to make specific commitments, encourage representatives to interact more with students and make their work more noticeable.
- The article urges readers to question candidates and representatives about their promises and concerns, or at least vote.