Tension boiled over at last night’s nearly three-hour ASSU meeting, which was the first of the newly sworn-in ninth Undergraduate Senate. Much of the debate centered on a possible schism between SOCC-endorsed candidates and Stanford Review-endorsed candidates; the Senate chair and deputy chair narrowly claimed victory in hotly contested votes; and, in a dramatic moment, Senator Jonathan Kass ‘10 proposed revoking his vote for Eugene Nho ‘10 as deputy chair.

Priyanka Sharma ‘09 was selected as chair, defeating Patrick Cordova ‘09 in an 8-7 vote. Eugene Nho ‘10 — whose campaign video parodying the movie “300” on YouTube helped him win the most votes of any candidate for Senate — was ultimately elected deputy chair, defeating Stuart Baimel ‘09 in another 8-7 vote after an intense controversy and potential revote.

Chair elections

In the Senate chair elections, the two candidates laid out their platforms. Sharma promised to fight for OSA reforms, a South Asian Studies department, sustainability and gender-blind housing. Cordova also promised to work for sustainability and mental health issues, as well as faculty diversity, citing his concerns for gay faculty seeking tenure.

But it was the notion of a divided Senate that proved most controversial in the battle for chair.

“This year, my passion is a successful, united Senate,” Sharma said. “Apart from my personal skills and goals, my position in the Senate also aids my candidacy. I am not a SOCC- or Stanford Review-endorsed candidate.”

Cordova, a Review-endorsed candidate, said his endorsements by both the Stanford Democrats and the Stanford Republicans, as well as The Stanford Review and The Stanford Progressive qualified him for the top position in the Senate.

“Some have tagged me as a partisan in this race,” he said. “I was thrilled to be endorsed by many different organizations.”

“I hope you all realize that I’m an open-minded person,” he added. “This is not about me, this is not about Priyanka, this is about us.”

Luukas Ilves ‘09, ASSU senator and editor-in-chief of The Stanford Review, defended Review-endorsed candidates.

“The Stanford Review endorsements do not pin you into a camp,” he said.

Sharma and Cordova participated in a question-and-answer session that touched on their leadership styles, their advocacy for faculty and student diversity and concerns about a torn Senate.

“As we all know, there are two big endorsements that are in the student body,” Sharma said. “The reason I did not get these endorsements is that I did not apply for these endorsements.”

“I know I had a lot of endorsements, but the end of the day, they’re a lot of help for flyering,” Cordova retorted. “I was actually planning on applying for the Students of Color Coalition. I’m 25 percent Hispanic.”

Baimel opposed the assertion that The Review endorsement was a polarizing factor.

“I don’t agree with your characterization of us as the big two endorsements,” he said. “I would think the second biggest endorsement is the Stanford Democrats. We didn’t even push an agenda on people. We asked them about OSA and very general things.”

Though ASSU Vice President Mondaire Jones ‘09 pointed out that all votes should be public according to the ASSU Constitution, the senators agreed that votes should be cast by secret ballot, as they have in the past.

Deputy chair elections

After more than an hour of discussion, Sharma won the chair election. But the debate was far from over, as deputy chair candidates outlined their platforms.

“My vision is a united Senate,” Nho said in his speech. “By united, I don’t mean homogeneous. People are going to have different interests and different views. That is the beauty of democracy.”

Baimel also defended his qualifications, citing his interest in working with the Faculty Senate, a traditional duty of the deputy chair.

“I applied for the SOCC endorsement and I was told that I missed the deadline,” he said. “That does not mean that I am not interested in SOCC issues.”

“If I am the undergraduate representative to the Faculty Senate, I want to make sure the Faculty Senate understands our position on faculty diversity,” he added. “One thing I would like to see is the ethnic groups work better together.”

Both Nho and Baimel said that unity should be a key concern for the Senate.

“I agree that you guys are all independent,” Nho said. “If there’s anything that ties the Review side together it is that they are afraid of what happened last year. I know that they don’t want SOCC to be dominating this year. I am not a SOCC senator but I am also not Review [endorsed]. Frankly, I don’t even want to mention the two sides.”

“I don’t want to see 8-7 every single time,” Baimel added. “I want to see 15-0 where we all agree to move forward as unified Senate.”

A revote

Baimel didn’t get what he wished for. In another 8-7 vote, Nho was selected as deputy chair.

The meeting then reached its climactic moment, when Kass said he was considering changing his deputy chair decision.

“I’m starting to reconsider my vote for the deputy chair,” he said.

“It’s a moot point,” Jones retorted. “I would have been the tiebreaker and I would have voted for Eugene anyway.”

But Kass did not want to abstain. He wanted to switch his vote to Baimel.

“This is ridiculous,” Jones said. “It’s a stunt.”

“I’m really sorry, you guys,” Kass said. “I had two minutes to decide. I made a quick decision.”

While senators scrambled to find the procedure for repealing a vote, Sharma interrupted, announcing that Kass would let his initial vote stand if the Senate agreed to make Baimel the Faculty Senate representative.

Nho was skeptical.

“I think that’s something for me and [Baimel] to talk about,” he said. “I am personally really shocked by what’s going on right now. If I believe that Stuart is an ideal candidate for Faculty Senate, I will gladly have a place for him.”

Some senators expressed their confusion, and exasperation filled the room.

“This is a circus,” Kass said. “I don’t think this is necessarily the right thing to do. In this case, I do not want to repeal my vote.”

Committee selection

Though the crisis was averted, another debate sprung up almost immediately.

Earlier this week, Jones asked senators to rank their committee preferences; he then compiled a list of committee assignments. Last night, the vice president put forth a bill that proposed the Senate move forward with his assignments.

Some senators opposed the plan, and argued that it was the chair’s duty to assign members to committees.

“As I understand,” Ilves said, “it is under the purview of the chair to assign committees.”

“I did not submit [my] preferences to Mondaire,” said Tomas Vacek ‘10. “There were two problems that have been going on with the selection process. It was first come, first serve. I don’t think it was appropriate to assign people that shouted out first. I have been informed by some other candidates that some people’s preferences have changed since then.”

“I think you guys are trying to make a big deal out of something,” said ASSU President Hershey Avula ‘08. “It’s up to you guys.”

Jones argued against the notion that he was unfair in the committee assignments, saying that he was merely trying to save time, and the Senate could change committees if they liked.

“I volunteered to collect that information and to formally present it,” Jones said. “It’s up to you guys.”

“I don’t think that the bill reflects what we actually want to be on,” Baimel said.

Sharma tried to calm down the debate.

“Everyone send me your top three choices,” she said. “I would just prefer it if everybody sent in their preferences.”

Sharma suggested that she would work out the committee assignments herself. More than two and a half hours after it began, Sharma adjourned the meeting.