Student democracy is a fundamental principle of the MSU, but as participation falters, what can we do to re-centre it in student life?
Election turnout is a yearly topic of discussion at the Silhouette and throughout the MSU, whether there excitement at high participation, or more frequently worry over student disinterest.
The 2024 McMaster Students Union presidential election saw a 56 per cent increase in voter turnout from 2023, something re-elected MSU President Jovan Popovic saw as a testament to the MSU’s increasing connection with students coming out of the pandemic. But while this increase in turnout is important, it misses the reality that the MSU has been in a crisis of democratic disengagement for years.
The introduction of electronic voting to MSU elections in 2010 saw student participation jump from nine per cent to 22 per cent in one year. Over the next 7 years, turnout continued on an upward trend, remaining for 5 years at over 40 per cent until its sudden 13 per cent drop in 2018. From then on, presidential elections have continued to see disappointingly low voter turnout and overall engagement in student politics, including the acclamation of a president in 2021 when only one candidate ran.
Even last year’s rebound hides ongoing struggles. 2024’s MSU General Assembly saw a 50 per cent decline in attendance since 2023, from ten to five members present, more than 750 people shy of quorum each time. This not only means that the General Assembly’s resolutions are non-binding, but that it also fails to effectively inform the Student Representative Assembly of student opinion.
The difference between presidential election turnout and participation in the other facets of student democracy illustrates students’ complex relationship with the MSU and its president. The well publicized presidential race, with platforms full of often detailed and/or ambitious promises, attracts participation perhaps because it seems to be the easiest and highest impact way to have your voice heard in the MSU.
The well publicized presidential race, with platforms full of typically detailed and/or ambitious promises, attracts participation perhaps because it seems to be the easiest and highest impact way to have your voice heard in the MSU.
The presidential election is democracy at work without the complex procedure of the SRA, the referendum process, or the General Assembly. These procedures exist for a reason but they have to be balanced with creating a democratic spirit among students.
There is one exception to the recent democratic decline of the MSU, and that is 2024’s bike share referendum, which saw what was for a referendum tremendous turnout. In a year when the only other referendum, the Food Accessibility Initiative, failed to gain enough votes to meet quorum, the bike share referendum passed with tremendous support.
The bike share campaign was a long and very public one, with student activists pushing the measure through at every step of the referendum process. The referendum’s supporters had over a year to promote their position on the referendum.
The MSU’s election rules limit campaigning to a set period prior to referenda, to ensure fairness. McMaster bike share was able to work around this because the process of gathering signatures — which the bike share needed as a student initiated referendum — did not violate the campaigning rules. Without this extra campaign period the bike share referendum might not have succeeded in getting the necessary 10 per cent voter turnout for a referendum to be valid.
The alternative however, was demonstrated in the failure of the Food Security Initiative, initiated by President Popovic. Campaigning was limited to a brief period prior to the referendum and without ample time to inform and excite students, not enough turned out.
While the strict campaign period makes sense for the election of student representatives, as it is important that those elections be competitive and that each candidate be given a fair chance, referenda are not competitions. Limiting elected representatives' allowed time to communicate with their constituents for or against a referendum is not an effective way to encourage student democracy.
Simply informing students of a referendum shortly before the voting period without much opportunity to inspire them to take action appears to be an ineffective way of increasing political participation. If our best examples of democratic culture rely on motivating students through positive messaging — whether that be the platforms of promising presidential candidates or the potential benefits of passing a referendum — it may be time to reconsider how we allow students to be informed about their student union's initiatives.
Students need more freedom to actively and effectively participate in their student government on their often limited schedule. Empowering students and our political representatives to promote their initiatives actively
On Oct. 22, McMaster students headed to the polls, voting in their respective wards for councillor, mayoral and trustee candidates, respectively. Despite improvements overall for the city, the numbers suggest that student turnout continues to falter.
Overall turnout this year for the city was up from the 2014 municipal election turnout, with 38.6 per cent of eligible voters compared to 34.02 per cent casting a ballot.
Ward 1 also saw an increase in turnout with 8,944 ballots cast, resulting in a 42.52 per cent turnout. This is an improvement from 2014 and 2010, when turnout was at 40.74 per cent and 40.70 per cent, respectively.
Age and McMaster-specific voting stats are not available, but city-wide and poll-by-poll results in Ward 1 offer a glimpse into how many McMaster students voted.
Binkley United Church, Dalewood Elementary School and Temple Anshe Sholom are three of the closest polling stations to campus. In 2014, these three stations counted 1,725 combined votes. This election, that number was at 1,784.
However, this year, a new polling station at the Church of God Hamilton also registered 312 ballots.
McMaster has around 31,000 students. Even if all the votes at the four closest stations were students, the combined 2,096 votes cast at those polls is under 10 per cent of the student population. If only 10,000 Mac students live on campus or in student housing, 2,096 votes would still fall well short of 30 per cent turnout.
Because many students live in other wards and may have voted there, it is hard to measure student turnout completely accurately. However, the polling numbers seem to indicate that student turnout still remains low in student housing areas, with small to modest improvement from 2014 to 2018.
Before the election, the McMaster Students Union ran a MacVotes campaign to encourage students to head to the polls. On the day of, MacVotes continued tabling and walked students to the polling stations.
MSU vice president (Education) Stephanie Bertolo said that candidate campaign staff told MacVotes that a large number of voters at Dalewood Recreation Centre and Binkley United Church registered on the day of the election. Many of these were likely students who had never voted in Hamilton at their current address.
“Overall, I believe we ran a very successful campaign,” said Bertolo. “Many students engaged with the campaign both online and at our table, asking us questions about how to get out to vote.”
Nonetheless, the city-reported polling numbers suggest that the campaign was only somewhat successful in increasing student turnout, at least for this election. One way to potentially improve student turnout is to have more convenient polling stations for students.
During the 2006 municipal election, there was a polling station on campus. However, the station was pulled in 2010 and has not been reinstated since.
Newly elected Ward 1 Councillor Maureen Wilson said in a statement after the election that she supports a McMaster polling station.
“Not having a voting poll at McMaster University campus is not in the best interest of our city, our nation or our democracy,” Wilson said. “We must normalize voting and make it easier, not more difficult.”
Despite the MacVotes team’s increased push to promote voting, it appears many students still opted not to vote. While the underlying factors and reasons for not voting are unclear, is is fair to say there is a lot of work still to be done to motivate students to get civically engaged.
[spacer height="20px"][thesil_related_posts_sc]Related Posts[/thesil_related_posts_sc]
