Pearse: Progressive Alliance’s endorsement of McGee is “ill-founded”
On Friday, April 10, I was given the opportunity to attend the Progressive Alliance debates as the co-president of Rainbow Alliance hoping to see how these three nominees would represent the LGBT community here at Northwestern as well as the entire student body as a whole.
After answering various questions concerning student group funding, student sustainability and the improvement of student life, I must admit that I was impressed with all of their presentations. However, it came as a shock that the majority consensus chose to support Mike McGee as our preferred candidate. While I must respect the recommendation of the Progressive Alliance, I personally believe that this nomination was ill-founded and as a member of the Progressive Alliance with different viewpoints on this issue, I must voice my support for Bill Pulte and Patrick Dawson over Mike McGee and Tommy Smithburg.
What distinguish the two candidates in my mind are the differences in involvement and commitment that the two nominees have shown to me, both as a student and Co-President of the Rainbow Alliance. While Patrick has always been a very strong supporter of the LGBT community within ASG for the past three years, Bill made it a point to reach out and discuss his candidacy with Rainbow Alliance, giving general members a chance to understand and question his vision for the student body.
Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for Mike McGee, who has not expressed interest in involvement as far as Rainbow Alliance is concerned. Furthermore, I know that this is the case for other members of the Progressive Alliance as well. I find it disheartening that such a collection of student groups would endorse a candidate who has not taken the time to get acquainted with the various concerns raised by these members of the student population.
Throughout the debates, Bill made it very clear that his campaign emphasizes results from a student government that must work in tandem with Northwestern’s administration to appropriately represent our student body, and his work as the former ASG Vice President presented a very impressive precedent for his future goals. However, I did not hear such tangible accomplishments from either of the other two candidates, which gives little hope to see decisive action in their platforms.
Furthermore, it must be noted that Patrick Dawson received unanimous approval from every member of the Progressive Alliance as the candidate most able to understand and represent the needs of the attending student groups. Such an unprecedented consensus on one individual must be taken into account when deciding the support for a particular candidate, yet this seemed to have been dismissed from the final ruling.
As an ultimate decision for endorsement, I feel that the Progressive Alliance made a hasty and poorly thought-out choice. As an attending member of these debates, I wonder what different platform was presented that I must have failed to hear since it is clear with whom our support must lie. Bill Pulte and Patrick Dawson have proven their dedication and commitment to student representation and I must encourage every one of you to research these candidates on all you can to understand the facts behind the various endorsements that you will hear. Bill and Patrick have both shown their support for a group of students that I care deeply about, as well as for our entire campus, and I would not have written this letter if I thought otherwise. All I can ask is that you discuss these issues with your friends and understand the visions, positions, and backgrounds of each candidate before casting your vote this coming Wednesday in order to truly take advantage of the dedicated students that await your approval as representatives.
Sincerely,
William Pearse
Weinberg junior
Co-President, Rainbow Alliance
| Print
Did Barack Obama campaign at the Heritage Foundation? With Patrick Dawson on the ticket, it was probably a waste of time for McGee to try to win over members of Rainbow.
publius
April 12, 2009 at 7:28 pm
How curious that you point out Mike and Tommy not reaching out to Rainbow when Bill feels it a waste of time to even try to attend the FMO event this evening. I think they both represent the same idea that it is pointless to reach out to a student group with membership clearly already in favor of a certain ticket.
It is also interesting that you say Tommy and Mike have no accomplishments to show for their time in ASG when they have many more tangible results than Bill (his sole completed project being ASG ListIt).
This “ill-founded” editorial represents not a minority opinion of the Progressive Alliance but the opinion of a firmly entrenched member of Bill and Pat’s campaign – at least recognize this much and get over it. This is a campaign – you win some you lose some – Neal didn’t whine and I didn’t see editorials complaining about how he didn’t get the Coalition of Colors or Progressive Alliance endorsements last year.
You should be less surprised by the verdict and realize Rainbow Alliance is only one of many groups in the Progressive Alliance. They clearly understand that Mike and Tommy have the most realistic and truthful platform with leaders that have shown in the past year they can accomplish projects from RideShare to Airport Shuttles to an Academic Advising Fair, NUPAL and beyond.
student
April 12, 2009 at 10:50 pm
FMO to my knowledge already backed McGee before discussion even began. Figures…as for the Progressive Alliance ticket, there seems to be a bit of unfairness and politicking going on by McGee/Smithburg. Figures…
yo
April 13, 2009 at 12:49 pm
As someone who was in the room during the Progressive Alliance forum, I would like to offer some observations about the process:
-almost everyone went into the room with at least a soft preference for either Bill Pulte and Patrick or Mike and Tommy Smithburg.
-there is nothing nefarious about that fact. Both sets of candidates had reached out to most of the members in the room, and most of the people in that room had worked with either Mike or Patrick on various student groups or student-initiated projects at some point during their college careers, and naturally would have developed biases in favor of those candidates based on those interactions
-though they may have been predisposed to backing one candidate or another, all of the people in the room listened attentively and respectfully to each candidate as he described his platform
In the end, the endorsement decision probably came down to a calculated decision for most people at the forum, and not a “hasty and poorly thought-out choice” and Pearse alleges in his letter. While the progressive credentials of Mike and Patrick could not be questioned in good faith, Bill and Tommy have done little-to-nothing to advance the interests of these groups during their three years on campus, or show that they were in solidarity with the groups on the issues they care about. While Bill has done a good job with his frat and with his business, and while Tommy has done a good job with campus transportation issues, ultimately these accomplishments were peripheral to Mike and Pat’s commitment to progressive causes. Mike being at the top of the ticket was likely the deciding factor; a Pat-Bill ticket likely would have been much more competitive for the PA endorsement.
Pearse’s letter is an unfortunate reaction to what was by all accounts a very fair process. I hope that it doesn’t jeopardize the willingness of our groups to work together to raise awareness of the issues that unite us.
PA Member
April 13, 2009 at 3:03 pm
As someone else who was in the room there during the debate, I actually have to disagree with the above comment (and agree wholeheartedly with the article).
Bill Pulte and Pat Dawson clearly outshone Mike McGee and Tommy Smithburg in their answers to questions posed to them. Pat Dawson alone had done more than almost all of the other candidates combined on Progressive Alliance issues, and spoke with clarity and conviction on the questions that were raised.
The same could not have been said for Mike and Tommy. I know for a fact that one of the members of the Progressive Alliance who got to sit in on the debate (the sitting senator from SEED, Julia Brook), is on Mike McGee’s campaign team. First and foremost, this is an obvious conflict of interest. The zealousness with which she tried to tear Bill Pulte and Pat Dawson down during deliberations was disappointing at best, and malicious at worst. It was a shame to see it go that far.
Bill Pulte and Pat Dawson deserved that endorsement. Period.
Anonymous
April 13, 2009 at 5:25 pm
Julia Brooke just sucks. She doesn’t do anything in Senate and just incapable, period.
Senator
April 14, 2009 at 1:35 pm
Learn how to spell my name anonymous senator. As for your accusations let me clear a few things up. I have remained perpetually mature about this entire election as a conscious effort to maintain some sense of dignity throughout and after the election. I have not resorted to comments such as these and refuse to be targeted as a “malicious” member of the P.A. I, unlike most people at the debate, have been a member of Senate and have seen how all four candidates work. There was no “tearing Bill Pulte and Pat Dawson down” in fact, I was the first to admit they have a strong platform and strong credentials. On that note, I also spoke of my respect for Dawson and all that he has done for the Rainbow Alliance and gender-friendly housing. It is disheartening for me to read a letter like this from William Pearse when he himself did not speak up during the debate. The debate was EXTREMELY well moderated and every single person had the opportunity to say what they wanted. Yes I fully endorse Mike and Tommy for ASG President and Vice President. This does not Give Bill Pulte and his supporters the right to make assumptions about me and my Senator seat. This election is NOT about ME, it is about the candidates. On an end note, I am taking this time to ask Pulte for an apology for speaking about me to my sorority sisters and spreading falsities about my intentions and my integrity, he knows what I am referring too. I’m waiting.
Over and Out,
Julia
Julia Brook
April 16, 2009 at 1:32 am
As for the “conflict of interest” that “ANONYMOUS” posted about…are you serious? Pat Dawson is the PRESIDENT of Rainbow Alliance…can you honestly tell me there is no “conflict of interest” in that equation?
Julia Brook
April 16, 2009 at 1:34 am
“This “ill-founded” editorial represents not a minority opinion of the Progressive Alliance but the opinion of a firmly entrenched member of Bill and Pat’s campaign – at least recognize this much and get over it.”
Actually, a significant minority – a third of the Progressive Alliance – strongly backs Bill and Pat. In addition, it is misleading to criticize Will Pearse for coming into the debates already supporting Bill and Pat, because Rainbow Alliance as a whole supported Bill and Pat from the beginning.
Mykell Miller
April 17, 2009 at 12:27 am
Well looks like that is settled. Congrats Mike and Tommy!!
Julia Brook
April 17, 2009 at 7:41 pm