This year’s Student Government election was without a doubt a mess. I’m not going to lay blame at any one person’s feet—that was handled at the Student Government Association election board hearing—but I will say the election as a whole was unprofessional, from cheating allegations to social media wars, and the responsibility is on the entire SGA to prevent a repeat next year.

And while individuals are certainly at fault, it’s hard to blame them when the SGA bylaws have so many holes to fill.

Concluding the April 16 hearing, the board found Jesse Brown only responsible for the charge of illegal influencing of voters. The 34 votes Brown gained by violating election codes were invalidated but he still had a strong majority, and according to SGA bylaws, if a violation doesn’t change the outcome of the election, the election can’t be voided.

I can’t speak on the innocence of any particular candidate, but the Student Government Association as a whole is guilty of failing the student population they are supposed to represent. The SGA bylaws, for one, need immediate revision. It’s immoral to say an election can only be voided if the violations change the outcome of the election. I see why this would be the rule—what does it matter if a candidate cheats if they would have swept the competition anyway?

It matters because it sets a frightening precedent. Future candidates for student government elections will now know they can cheat and get away with it—as long as they’re savvy enough. Even worse, our next student government president is someone who was found guilty of breaking SGA code and illegally influencing voters. So even if the violations didn’t have a profound impact on the election outcome, finding that the president violated the procedures he is now tasked with enforcing questions the integrity of future elections and SGA itself.

Brown is not the only one with a questionable moral compass. While it was wrong for people to dig up candidate Marco Torres’ social media posts, some from years ago, it reflects badly on Torres that he would ever make such potentially offensive posts on social media, and worse, not think to delete them when he made the choice to run for an election position.

I wish the whole election had been voided or they had given the position to Julie Brady, who received only 11 percent of the vote. It’s embarrassing that I would actually be happy just to have a student government president that didn’t break election codes or make offensive social media posts. The bar should be higher.

Last year there was an anonymous complaint about the election and nothing came of it. This year however, probably due to the spectacle this election created, the hearing had a full house. Keith Lamb, vice president of student affairs and enrollment managemet, who helped in the process, said there were holes that needed to be filled in the SGA by-laws, and I agree.

The impact of this train-wreck election is far-reaching. It creates an air of distrust and immaturity that hangs over all of student government. Surely SGA members had some knowledge of what was going on in this election – why did no one speak out publicly? Staying silent when you know something wrong is happening makes you just as guilty and accountable as the person doing the wronging.

The blame comes down on past, current and future SGA members because it was their candidates and their bylaws that created this fiasco. And ultimately, it is SGA that will have to make a change to avoid a repeat of this election.

Jesse Brown has a personal stake in righting this wrong for future elections. Not just because he is the figurehead of SGA, but because the election scandal will reflect on his character whether he was found innocent or not. Taking charge to amend and enforce bylaws will go a long way in earning back the trust of constituents who he may have alienated during the election, including myself.

The first effort to fix SGA’s public image should be changing the bylaws. It isn’t enough to only void an election if violations change the results. Violations, of any nature, are grounds for a new election or disqualification of responsible candidates. SGA should make it publicly known their stance on these events to start the path towards transparency and authenticity.

Bri Sheen is a freshman in mass communication.