Bright colored fliers, hundreds of identical T-shirts and buttons with catchy slogans mean just one thing to some people: election time.
But behind the vibrant banners and booths it means something quite different. Money. And lots of it.
This year, three students took on the challenge of running in the 2007-08 Associated Students Inc. presidential elections. All three were well-qualified and wanted to make Cal Poly a better place for students.
And all three spent thousands of dollars on their campaigns.
“Every year as more people run, it gets more competitive and people spend more and more,” said Mia White, director of the elections committee for ASI.
Where the money comes from
President-elect Brandon Souza spent $4,000 on his campaign, the lowest of the three candidates. Matt Taylor spent $4,600 and Arvand Sabetian spent $6,000.
“I (ran) because I believe I can do the best for students. It’s not about the money,” Souza said. “Just because you don’t have a lot of money to put into a campaign doesn’t mean you aren’t qualified.”
In fact, in 2003, presidential candidate Allison Anderson ran with just $500 and won.
“Money doesn’t necessarily win you the campaign,” current ASI President Todd Maki said.
Candidates have many options to raise money for their campaign. Some fundraise or ask for donations from businesses, friends and family. Others choose to self-finance by working.
Taylor worked a full-time job all last year in order to fund his campaign, stating that he didn’t want his friends to pay for it.
“If you want to do this you should be willing to make the sacrifice,” Taylor said. “You shouldn’t be playing with other people’s chips.”
Souza and Sabetian combined donations from businesses, organizations, friends and family with their own money to fund the campaign, though most of Sabetian’s money came from his Internet business, Arvixe, LLC.
“You’re almost backed into a corner,” Souza said. “You’re going to have to spend some dough to get anywhere.”
No cap for candidates
Currently, ASI presidential candidates can spend as little or as much as they want on their campaign. There is no spending cap or any other regulations related to how much money is involved.
“The cost involved is huge, not only financially, but also the time and emotions,” Taylor said.
In the past, ASI had rules that limited the amount students could spend on a campaign and even discussed implementing a cap. But ultimately, they were advised not to for free speech reasons.
“Political money is protected by free speech laws,” 2005-06 ASI President Tylor Middlestadt said. “ASI as an organization has no right to limit how people spend their money.”
Despite the free speech argument, many campuses still impose caps on campaign spending.
CSU Long Beach found a middle ground by asking candidates to follow a voluntary spending limit when they sign on to run.
Boston University has a $500 cap for primary elections and candidates are allowed to spend an additional $150 if they advance to a second round.
“Something that low can’t even pierce the skin of an 18,000 student body,” Maki said.
Spending caps vary considerably; Texas A&M has a $1,500 limit while CSU Monterey Bay has a $75 limit.
“Other ASIs do have these policies that limit spending but they’re not legit,” Middlestadt said.
Another idea that had been proposed included ASI funding the candidates who ran for office, White said.
“If someone else funds it, then everyone’s going to jump in,” executive director of ASI Rick Johnson said.
When dollars matter at the polls
In addition to concerns over the quality of the candidates running is improving voter turnout campus wide.
“We don’t want campaigning to disrupt from life on campus,” White said. “But we want to get the vote up too.”
This year, 25.5 percent of the student body voted in the first round of elections and 14 percent voted in the run-off election.
“(Elections) are good for the campus because they get people’s attention,” Sabetian said. “It’s getting a lot of students to support ASI government and elections.”
The payoff
In return for serving as ASI president, the winning candidate is provided with a stipend during his or her term of office that covers tuition, room and board, books and supplies, personal and transportation expenses as estimated by the Financial Aid Office.
“It’s equivalent of a full ride scholarship,” Middlestadt said.
This year, that amount totaled $17,043 and for the 2007-08 academic year the total will be $17,901, according to the Financial Aid Web site.
The ASI president also gets their own parking spot and priority registration.
Reporting the numbers
ASI presidential candidates are required to write a $100 check to ASI prior to the start of campaigning. They receive a refund for that check when they complete a voluntary self-reported financial summary at the end of campaigning.
“There’s really no reason for someone not to report,” Sabetian said.
However, there is no system in place to check up on what the candidates are self-reporting.
“Right now it’s an honor system on what you’re reporting and not reporting,” Souza said. He planned to donate any leftover money he raised to Doctors Without Borders, a humanitarian organization that provides emergency health care.
After the candidates give their financial summary to Student Life and Leadership, it is sent to the ASI Business Office and the refund is processed.
Upon a Mustang Daily inquiry, ASI was unable to provide any financial reports from past elections.
“Any time money is involved you have to ask where it’s coming from and are there strings attached,” Middlestadt said. “It’s important for students to know where the candidates are getting their money.”
There have been no talks about implementing a voluntary cap or any other sort of campaign finance measures since 2004 when Middlestadt offered to head a committee to look into the matter.
“I felt that with the amount people were spending, it was intimidating people from running,” Middlestadt said. “If it gets to be so much that people aren’t even throwing their hat in the ring, then it’s a problem.”
Most people involved with elections said that the amount candidates spend on their campaigns is not a deterrent yet.
“It’s an issue that needs to be discussed,” Middlestadt said. “But it’s not a problem right now.”