This week, the Criterion editorial staff and senior reporters sat down to discuss ASG elections, the state of ASG this year and the potential for ASG next year.

First of all, the editorial staff was disappointed with the ASG presidential debates, not because of the candidates, but because of poor questions asked by moderators. None of these questions addressed real issues. Instead, candidates were asked about “leadership style” and “achievements.”

Questions that were avoided include “What do you think about raising student fees?”; “What would you do to change the responsibilities of your cabinet?”; or “What kind of precedent would you set for the use of executive orders?”

There was a great opportunity to hear the concrete opinions of candidates on applicable topics such as student fees or the changing of ASG cabinet responsibilities, but this opportunity was squandered.

Also, it’s very strange that a governmental body of any sort would run its own presidential debates. Instead, a panel of student leaders from different areas of campus should ask questions, as these people are more evenly distributed across campus interests than ASG itself.

Second, the Criterion editorial staff had a round-table discussion on our thoughts about each presidential ticket. Our staff was split on whom we would vote for but admitted that each presidential ticket has the potential to be a vast improvement over this year’s administration. Each ticket is capable of making notable positive changes to CMU. However, our staff had concerns with these candidates, as noted in figure 1 (above).

Third, the Criterion staff believes that the new ASG president, whomever it may be, has several obligations to uphold for its constituents in the 2014-15 school year.

Ultimately, the new president must instill culture change within ASG. The Ariel Diamond administration has spent much of its operating budget irresponsibly on ASG members, most notably on the ASG staff Christmas party ($640), tickets for ASG members to attend the Military Ball ($450), coffee mugs as a “work perk” ($250), two tables at the Ho’olokahi Luau for ASG members ($250), and, most recently, gifts for its graduating members ($315.60).

Instead of serving itself, our student government needs a president whose mission is to serve others. Culture change starts at the top of an organization and works its way down. It will take a strong ASG president to create a new, selfless culture amongst his staff.

If the senate creates legislation that doesn’t benefit the general student body, the president should not be afraid to veto this legislation. Regardless of the outcome of the legislation, the veto sends a message to the senate, reminding them of the motto that governs their work: “of the students, for the students.”

If a student has a problem with something that’s happening on campus, they should feel confident that ASG will open a door and an ear to their concerns. They should also be confident in their leadership’s influence with school administration and the board of trustees. Most importantly, they must be able to trust that ASG will advocate for the most important people on this campus—the students.

If our student government doesn’t advocate for students, then who will?