Election season…the fields of Iowa, the snows of New Hampshire, and of course, online voting for Executive Board Members of the Association of Amherst Students. That’s right – this Thursday, April 17th, is Election Day at Amherst. Usually, the candidates tout their extensive experience while calling for fundamental change. Sound familiar?
Here’s one statistic that is: voting in the last three E-Board elections has failed to exceed 50% of the student body, paralleling national statistics on the selection of officials. This is actually disgraceful. The 2005 elections in Iraq – in which 44 people died in attacks near polling stations – garnered a higher proportion of citizens voting than does this College, where the greatest risk in voting is breaking a fingernail clicking on a preferred candidate.
This comparison is no doubt beyond absurd; the Iraqis were voting for far more important things than which overachiever at Amherst gets a great addition to a resume. But as much as the power or authority of the Amherst E-Board is downplayed, I do think that electing the best candidates is important. Senate officials are not only the face of Amherst, but they represent our rights as students and our interests in a very real way.
One thing that is certainly in the average Amherst student’s interest is a better dining experience: better food, better hours, better meal plan options. Perhaps truly intending to solve dining-related problems – or perhaps simply pandering to our stomachs – candidates in the past have run solely on platforms of improving Val.
A recent New York Times article assures that this campaign strategy will no doubt be in full force this year. The article profiles scrumptious meals and flexible meal plans at other colleges, mentioning by name rivals such as Bowdoin, Wesleyan, Colby, Yale, Brown, Stanford, and even UMass. Sample dishes include pho (Vietnamese noodle soup) and vegetable ragout over polenta. Predictably, students here have started clamoring once again for a complete overhaul of the Amherst dining system. After all, what’s an endowment for if not filling our bellies with the finest cuisine 1.7 billion dollars can buy?
Well, there are a bunch of things we could do with the endowment. As for a Val overhaul, I’m not interested. Here’s why:
First of all, Val is not that bad. It’s not Per Se, I know – but it’s passable. The food is adequately nutritious. There is a fair amount of selection at each meal and always ample opportunity to construct a unique dish using certain Val staples. Main courses never appear more than once every two weeks in order to assure variety. The hours are actually very reasonable – food straight from 7:30 AM to 2:00 PM and three hours for dinner. The two-meal option is a great deal for someone who likes Schwemm’s but not waking up for breakfast.
Secondly, Val is getting better. In the past two years, dining services has introduced mezclun mix, gourmet pizza, a “lighter side” for the health-conscious, three sandwich presses, a stir-fry bar, waffles three meals a day, and that great salmon dish with the teriyaki fusion sauce. Val is improving – so lay off and let the improvements come gradually.
Finally, we have a dining services committee filled with five senators and two at-large students from the general body. Talk to them if you have a problem. More directly, the manager of dining services, Deborah Omasta-Mokrzecki, would be happy to take your criticisms and suggestions.
There are far more pressing issues to be dealt with on campus then the state of Valentine. E-Board candidates must show leadership and vision in discussing the Community Center for Engagement, the proposed Multicultural Center, changes in admission policy, the College’s Master Plan, and the introduction of new majors. I urge this year’s candidates to address these issues, and to forgo the easy but banal topic of our dining situation. Fellow students – vote (and do make sure to vote) for the best candidate. Please, don’t vote on Val.
After all, if it’s really that bad, there’s a simple solution. Enroll in a class at UMass and take the PVTA over for dinner. I hear they’re serving pho.
5 responses so far ↓
1 ahalterman11 (ahalterman11) // Apr 18, 2008 at 9:00 pm
While Val is clearly a sorry platform for a campaign, I didn’t hear any candidate campaigning about our beloved dining hall for this election. Come to think of it, I saw almost no campaigning at all. Except for the race for treasurer, all of the positions were uncontested. While promises for Val might have been the problem in years past, that issue is completely overshadowed by the lack of competitive elections. Maybe elections where people had to actually persuade people to support them would lead to better discussion of issues and higher voter turnout.
Perhaps in the future this forum will provide a place for candidates to debate serious issues and and voters to make informed decisions.
2 dullman10 (dullman10) // Apr 18, 2008 at 10:29 pm
That’s a good point. I wrote this before any information about candidates came out, but I’m also surprised by the lack of competition this year. And I do hope that this forum will be a place for debate about the issues in the future.
I would still predict that the Val platform will be in full effect for the next Senate elections. I think the same argument holds for those elections as well.
3 Scott Smith (ssmith09) // Apr 19, 2008 at 1:02 pm
I don’t have as rosy an opinion of Val as you, Dave, but I agree with the general sentiment here. I write to point out the the lunch and dinner meal plan is completely bogus. Thought I can’t find the numbers on the Dining Services page, I’m pretty sure it is the same price as the full meal plan, minus $100 in Schwemm’s-use-only Bonus Bucks. This is a huge rip off. Granted, I spend a lot of money at Schwemm’s and wouldn’t mind the extra $100, passing up on these bonus bucks allows unlimited access to the dining hall during business hours. The lunch-dinner plan only allows you to come into Val once during lunch and once during dinner. If the plans are this different, there should be a much more significant price cut from one to the other.
On a slightly different note, I’ve heard that Val is a for-profit business. Does anyone know the deal with this?
4 dullman10 (dullman10) // Apr 19, 2008 at 1:22 pm
According to my meal plan pamphlet, the lunch and dinner plan does not limit the number of times you can get lunch or dinner, but guarantees “unlimited access to the dining hall Sunday through Saturday [for] lunch and dinner.” This corresponds to my experience on the plan, so it’s a non-issue.
But some people think it’s a bad deal anyway. I tend to disagree. Here’s why: you don’t have to spend those $100 at Schwemm’s. You can use them to get breakfast at Val, which costs $3.
So the math works out so that this plan is worth it for anyone who gets breakfast less than 34 times in one semester. There are 14 weeks in this semester. Thus, the lunch & dinner plan is worth it even for someone who gets breakfast twice a week. I guarantee that there are a ton of students who eat breakfast twice a week or less. It is undeniably a better option for those students.
As for the for-profit situation, I don’t really know enough to comment. However, I’d imagine it’d be tough to find a not-for-profit food service. The College probably doesn’t have much choice; all competitors are likely for-profit so not much could be done about it.
5 eandrews09 (eandrews09) // Apr 23, 2008 at 12:36 am
Dave- this is Erik testing the commenting feature. I’ve changed permissions around and now I’m seeing if one can comment without having to be moderated.
Good stuff so far, dude! Don’t mind me.
Test test
You must log in to post a comment.