And The Candidates Are…

Presenting the candidates for Student Union offices, Fall 2010:

(Note, candidates with Asterisks next to their name have not officially declared a candidacy, but have expressed interest.)

Senator for TYP

Alyssa Green

Terrell Gilkey

*Alexis Munoz

Senator for North Quad

Alexander Bernstein

Jesse Hart

Sam Liang

Sarah Park

Brianda Penafort

Shekeyla Caldwell

Senator for Massell Quad

David Clements

Josh Kelley

Rosby Kome-Mensah II

Sidharth Rijhwani

Sharan Shah

Michael Sklaroff

Senator for 2014

Maria Alkhasova

Dillon Harvey

Jesse Koklas

Marsha Patel

Isaac Rabbani

Tiequin Roquerre

Mitchell Schwartz

Senator for Rosenthal

Elizabeth Fields

Elly Kalfus

Haemee Kang

Fuan Li (Franklin)

Senator for East

Sydney Appelbaum

Albert Feldman

Senator for Castle

Miriam Halimi

Senator for Ziv

Mark Levi

Scott Oglesby

Senator for Charles River

Tae Wan Kim

Brandeis Sustainability Fund Board Rep

*James Bartolacci

Yahav Itzkovich

Susan Paykin

Nicholas Polano

Senior Representative to the UCC

Jenna Rubin

Senator for Off-Campus

Evyn Rabinowitz

*Marcos Sandler

Senator for Village

Jake Weiner

Senator for Ridgewood

– * (Author’s Note: Although someone has expressed interest in this position, they were given more time to consider privately before announcing their position officially.)

Senator for Mods

Choose wisely.

Some thoughts on Senate Money Requests

I’ve never written a post for Innermost Parts before, and I’m not sure why I am now. Mostly it is because I did not get a chance to air out my ideas at the Senate meeting last night, and I think that a good number of people who care about Brandeis read this blog, either to compliment or to critique. The bylaw to change the way the Senate gives SMRs was defeated by a wide margin, in part due to the impassioned defenses of Rachel Graham Kagan and Andrew Brooks, who were there under the system as it stood before the constitutional changes in how the SAF was apportioned. And they were right to warn us away from that path, because it sounded like utter chaos. However, the fact that those who supported the bylaw change were swayed by those arguments is a confirmation to me that I had a fundamentally different view of this bill from my co-sponsors. So I write this to ask this community of people who care, do you think that the system as it stands is the best it can be? Because I don’t, and I think that if that bylaw amendment was not the best way to go about reform, we need to find a way that is.

Continue reading “Some thoughts on Senate Money Requests”

Recusal shenanigans

Something that came up during the case and in a recent Justice editirial was the decision by Lev and I not to recuse ourselves from the vote on the Bill Ayers / Robert King Senate Money Resolution. The Justice editorial stated,

We also take issue with the fact that Senators for the Class of 2011 Lev Hirschhorn and Alex Melman voted on the resolution even though they are members of Democracy for America, one of the organizations sponsored by the Senate’s $900. This is a conflict of interest, and the senators should have recused themselves.

I said this in the trial, but I want to repeat it here: No goddamn way. This would be true if we had a true “picuniary interest” in the vote; ie if we were set to personally make a lot of money because of it. Thats not true in the least; the SMR would have merely granted money towards an event that one of the clubs we were in was helping to plan. Unlike F-board, an organization with closed meetings that is supposed to remain unbiased and grant money in the most equitable way possible, the Senate is supposed to have opinions on its vote. This is reinforced by the ability of clubs to endorse candidates for Senate; F-board candidates are supposed to remain impartial and can receive no endorsements. To ask us to recuse ourselves from the vote is akin to asking every Senator who planned any project from recusing him or herself from the vote on whether to grant money to that project. This is not what the Senate has done in the past nor is it what the Senate should do in the future.

I said all this at the Senate meeting after careful consideration of the idea of recusal, suggested at the last minute by Treasurer Max Wallach. It is also important to note that every sophomore in the room (our constituency) urged us to vote on the issue lest they not be represented. To recuse ourselves would have been the irresponsible thing to do.

The Trial Of The Century

The frivolous lawsuit that Eric Alterman has launched against Alex Melman, Lev Hirschhorn, and the Union Senate is set to take place Saturday at 5pm. Location is TBD, witness lists and evidence are due by Friday at 5pm.

Below is the text of Chief Justice Rachel Graham Kagan’s email:

Having received a case for review from petitioner Eric Alterman against the Student Union Senate and specifically Class of 2011 Senators Lev Hirschhorn and Alex Melman, the Union Judiciary has unanimously decided to grant certiorari, and thus has agreed to hear the case.

Continue reading “The Trial Of The Century”

I Bet You Want To Know Election Results

And so here they are!!!

You will notice that Sahar and I are now running against one another. IT’S ON!

Off Campus:
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Nathan Goldstein 	43	79.63
2 	Mariam Akbar 	6	11.11
3 	ABSTAIN 	3	5.56
4 	Adam Jama 	1	1.85
4 	Jules Levenson 	1	1.85
6 	Mike Martin 	0	0.00
**Nate Goldstein winner by mandate
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Jonathan P. Freed 	13	72.22
2 	ABSTAIN 	3	16.67
3 	Mohit Gourisaria 	1	5.56
3 	Zachary Pyle 	1	5.56
**Jon Freed winner by mandate

Charles River
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Chenchao Lu 	8	47.06
2 	ABSTAIN 	4	23.53
3 	Ari D Jadwin 	2	11.76
4 	Feya hillel 	1	5.88
4 	Aaron Breslow 	1	5.88
4 	Rachel Kagan 	1	5.88
7 	David Jacobs 	0	0.00
**Chenchao Lu will be on the Final Round Ballot

Ziv Quad
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Andrew S.M. Brooks 	45	55.56
2 	Daniel N. Baronofsky 	25	30.86
3 	ABSTAIN 	6	7.41
4 	Alex Trott 	2	2.47
5 	Nathaniel Rosenblum 	1	1.23
5 	Jae Kyo Han 	1	1.23
5 	Gustavo Pardo 	1	1.23
**Andrew Broooks winner by mandate

Rosenthal Quad
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Philips C. Loh 	26	54.17
2 	Stephen D. Robinson 	21	43.75
3 	ABSTAIN 	1	2.08
4 	Stephen Robinson 	0	0.00
**Philips Loh winner by mandate

Castle Quad
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Sahar Massachi 	16	29.63
1 	Nathan J. Robinson 	16	29.63
3 	Philip Y. Lu 	14	25.93
4 	Naomi S. Cohn 	7	12.96
5 	ABSTAIN 	1	1.85
**Nathan Robinson and Sahar Massachi move to the Final Round

East Quad
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Sara Enan 	51	48.11
2 	Edward J. Tanenbaum 	50	47.17
3 	ABSTAIN 	5	4.72
4 	Sara 	0	0.00
4 	Sarah Enan 	0	0.00
**Final Round will consist of Sara Enan and Edward Tanenbaum

Massell Quad
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Nipun Marwaha 	47	28.83
2 	Narayan H. Wong 	33	20.25
3 	Savannah L. Pearlman 	32	19.63
4 	Nicholas B. Petrocchi 	31	19.02
5 	Hillel Buechler 	16	9.82
6 	Jeremy Fineberg 	2	1.23
6 	ABSTAIN 	2	1.23
8 	Hillel 	0	0.00
**Final Round will consist of Nipun and Narayan

North Quad
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Andrew L. Hogan 	92	56.10
2 	Richard E. Alterbaum 	52	31.71
3 	Aneil Tripathy 	9	5.49
4 	Eli Tarlow 	5	3.05
5 	ABSTAIN 	4	2.44
6 	Gabriel Weingrod Nemzow 	1	0.61
6 	Josh Eisenberg 	1	0.61
**Andrew Hogan wins by a mandate

Class of 2012
Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Supreetha Gubbala 	182	35.40
2 	Akash J. Vadalia 	147	28.59
3 	Joseph S. Sloman 	128	24.90
4 	ABSTAIN 	51	10.00
5 	Raechel Banks 	1	0.20
5 	Ellen Franz 	1	0.20
5 	Hillel Buechler 	1	0.20
5 	Parth Krishna 	1	0.20
5 	Sidak Pannu 	1	0.20
5 	Narayan Wong 	1	0.20
11 	Reggie Schulman 	0	0.00
**Final Round will contain Supreetha, Akash and Joseph

Rank 	Candidate 	Votes	%
1 	Danny Goncalves 	5	38.46
2 	Terrence Johnson 	4	30.77
3 	Tyjuan Morrow 	3	23.08
4 	Ngoc Nguyen 	1	7.69
5 	Terrance 	0	0.00
5 	ABSTAIN 	0	0.00
**Final Round will consist of write in candidates, Danny Goncalves and Terrence