Oracle Online

While admiring Pesko and Seeman’s concept of installing a Dean of Diversity, Erickson questioned whether the support necessary from administration existed to install such a position. He said that the campaign he and Falde were running would benefit all students by trying to address the fact that “there’s a great divide on this campus” and working to make HUSC an advocacy organization.

Both teams did have similar views regarding what their concept of a perfect student congress would be, with Pesko citing his desire to represent “all students on this campus” through his team’s eight-point platform which will, according to Pesko and Seeman, benefit all students on campus. Erickson and Falde took a broader view of things, with Erickson saying that he believes in the power of student congress to incite change on campus. “I have to believe that student congress is as powerful as it can be,” said Erickson, reminding listeners that HUSC funds much of what they experience on campus.

Another moment of dissent arose in discussion of the issue of working for a student on the Board of Trustees. Pesko/Seeman said that although they admired such a goal, they felt that it was not a goal that could be accomplished, while Erickson and Falde argued that they needed to build student support and work to continue to pressure administration. When each team was asked to identify the greatest strength of the opposing team’s platform. Seeman said Erickson/Falde’s continuing the goal of putting a student on the Board of Trustees and working towards greater accessibility on campus as highlights. Pesko agreed that working for accessibility was a “very noble goal” but said that as HUSC Vice President, he had discovered that there are some places on campus which would be impossible to make accessible to all.

In answering this question, Erickson said that was the key difference between his and Falde’s ideological campaign and that of Pesko/Seeman. The eight-point platform proposed by Pesko/Seeman, he said, is very achievable, “very easy to digest...[with] a lot of ideas people can latch onto.”

Finally, each team was asked to sum up its platform in one word and explain why. Erickson said “Student-centered,” and then jokingly asked if hyphenated words were allowed. He said that Pesko/Seeman’s view that pursuing a student on the Board of Trustees is not worthwhile is “the attitude we’re fighting.”

Finishing up the evening, Pesko reiterated the attainability of their campaign by answering simply, “Accomplishable,” while Seeman ended the debates with the promise, “We will work as hard as we can.”