Today is the first day of SA elections, which are open until May 4 at noon. Accordingly, the Cornell Review reached out for interviews from each candidate for SA President and SA Executive Vice President. In the interest of fairness, we asked them an identical set of questions about their thoughts on current issues and plans for action should they be elected. This article contains the responses of Rocco DeLorenzo ‘24 and Claire Ting ‘25. They are competing for the role of Executive Vice President of the Student Assembly.
Review: What do you plan to do for students if elected? How do you plan to work with the administration to accomplish these goals?
DeLorenzo: The Presidential and EVP roles of the Cornell SA are inherently unique because, at least while campaigning, you are encouraged to make campaign promises with actionable goals, but if you are elected, you are supposed to remain neutral in most, if not all, circumstances. This is why instead of making large scale promises like other candidates, I have chosen general guiding principles as for why people should vote for me. These guiding principles are… T.A.C.O.S… which stand for Transparency, Advocacy, Cornell, Organization of the Assembly, and Sustainability. Recently, the Cornell SA made national news for a resolution passed, so my plan if elected is to create the necessary “bumpers” within the assembly to ensure level-headed decision making and that members “do their homework.” As someone who already has well established relationships with Administration through my roles as VP of Finance on the SA and IFC President, I plan to accomplish these goals by engaging with them more often for guidance for the assembly as a whole.
Ting: My biggest goal is to ensure wellness and safety through lasting infrastructure for our community. Threats to healthcare, wellness, and safety apply to everyone regardless of identity, and all students are affected when Cornell fails to provide effective support systems in a time of crisis. I intend to find ways to resolve structural inefficiencies, as they only slow the ability to help students. This includes efforts for broader healthcare coverage through identifying common health concerns by coordinating with Cornell Health and the Skorton Center to learn where their pain points and potential areas of expansion are. I also intend to work with administrators to map out how exactly to implement these goals from a practical standpoint.
Review: The SA has struggled to attain student interest, with a voter participation rate of about 10% in the previous election. Additionally, all but one candidate in this election will be awarded a seat on the assembly. How do you think this affects the SA’s legitimacy, and how do you hope to resolve this issue?
DeLorenzo: Every year the Cornell SA elections come at possibly the most inopportune time possible because of the overlap with finals and the end of the semester push. Additionally, since most Cornell students receive numerous emails from Cornell a day (most of which are ignored or deleted on sight), I think that with a 10% participation rate, this truly does hurt this organization’s credibility. As a student leader on campus, I can help to resolve this issue by advocating for members to go out and vote with a council-wide email explaining when elections are and what they are for. Additionally, I believe that setting up a monthly newsletter to all Cornell undergraduates in the future with information about what the SA is doing would help to benefit the voter turnout.
Ting: A major problem when it comes to [the] Student Assembly is our level of perceived legitimacy by the public and our ability to make a change. This is caused by a lack of understanding of what it is we do and where we can create an impact within the Cornell community. Resolving this issue means active engagement and outreach with campus leaders to support their initiatives because what shifts a student into a self-identified constituent is when they feel as though student governance has made a tangible difference in their lives/communities. Our committees need to become more active and transparent in their endeavors and create lasting ties between major student organizations and the Student Assembly. These active partnerships, projects, and initiatives are what bridge the disconnect between the Assembly and campus life, which indirectly ameliorates the issue of voter participation. Through these efforts, the stakes become higher for specific constituencies if they don’t vote because there is then a risk of halted or even reversed progress in the future.
Review: This year is a byline funding year for the Student Assembly. How do you hope to change the way Student Activity Fee money is spent?
DeLorenzo: As the current VP of Finance for this past off-year, I have worked closely with Cornell administration and Campus Activities to work on fixing our governing documents to add additional structure to the various different byline organizations. Although Resolution 36: Amending the Student Assembly Charter has yet to be officially passed, it has received tremendous support and we hope to officially pass the resolution at our last meeting of the semester, May 4th. Broadly speaking, this resolution classifies all the byline organizations into four groups: Primary Funding Boards, Supplementary Funding Boards, Programming, and Departmental.
By organizing the bylines in this way:
Primary Funding Boards will have a standardized maximum cap of funding individual organizations at $8,000 per year, with a second unlockable tier of $5,000 per year.
All bylines will be listed in the Charter and there will be less overall stipulations attached to the spending of each organization.
All seven byline organizations classified under Programming are looking to form a more general programming council that will combine all those bylines into one larger byline. In the future, this will decrease the amount of rollover and wasteful end of semester spending done by organizations because funds can be shared across different umbrella bylines in the programming council.
Ting: Some major issues I have learned of from my time in the Assembly are not only the misuse of funding but also funds that have been sitting idly in accounts remaining unused. I hope to work more extensively within the Student Assembly’s appropriations committee to remedy these issues and implement accountability mechanisms against misuse. Over this past year, I have also seen deceptive practices from student organizations through my time on the appropriations committee. Holding student organizations to higher standards also means actively seeking transparency in spending, specificity for what the money is used for, and proactive measures in working with what an organization already has. With all of these practical measures implemented, I hope to see more support on the appropriations committee to fund organizations that can prove clearly that they have bettered student lives and bolstered a sense of community on campus.
Review: How comfortable do you feel speaking on behalf of the student body? Should the Student Assembly take up positions on broader political issues, or should it confine itself to Cornell specific problems?
DeLorenzo: Ever since joining the assembly, I have noticed this exact trend of members feeling obligated to pass resolutions taking a stand on certain issues external to Cornell. As Executive VicePresident, my role is to help support the president and other members of the assembly with operations and assisting in guiding discussion in a productive manner. Inherently, I do believe that people have every right to take a stand against an issue through advocacy efforts and resolutions, however, because of the position of the Student Assembly in leading the rest of the Cornell population, I dislike these efforts. In experience, they tend to complicate the overall operations of the assembly, and as EVP, one of my responsibilities is to ensure efficiency of the assembly, so there are certainly conflicting goals. I feel that in order to be the most effective and efficient assembly, limiting our work to the scope of Cornell would do the organization much better in the long run.
Ting: Everything is inherently political, as our identities exist beyond the scope of a college campus. Thus, I’m a firm believer that we should use careful discretion when determining if we should speak on behalf of a student community or not because the needs of our diverse constituencies can differ vastly. I’m more than happy to advocate for a cause that our student leaders feel passionately about, and by the same token, I am also more than willing to take a step back to elevate a community member’s voice first. What determines all of this is clear communication and collaboration, so that I don’t misrepresent a constituent. What’s also important to remember is that [the] Student Assembly has already taken on broader political issues in the past, because they inherently affect our campus life. Look to Resolution 28, where we as the Assembly have taken clear stances in protecting the right of any group to peacefully protest at Cornell and promoting the right of free expression of all values, views, and opinions.
Review: Cornell recently announced a theme for the 2023-2024 school year, “The Indispensable Condition: Freedom of Expression at Cornell.” The year is supposed to spark a campus conversation about free speech. How do you plan to lead the Student Assembly in approaching that conversation?
DeLorenzo: Since coming to Cornell in August 2020, when it pertains to the issue of free expression here at Cornell, I have grown more concerned of the direction we have been heading if a course correction is not implemented soon. Too often, political views spillover into academic and extracurricular dealings here, and if you disagree with what is being said, there is immense pressure to just go along with it rather than standing up for what you believe in. I plan to lead the assembly in approaching this conversation by allowing for disagreements and open debate on topics, especially for less popular opinions. I believe that everyone should have a voice and right to express their viewpoints, regardless of the stances they take.
Ting: I intend to lead by setting standards of decorum, civility, and respect. Free speech is an inalienable right that we are blessed to have, because it creates space to resolve conflict, to learn from one another, and to understand perspectives that are not our own. Historically, [the] Student Assembly has had its moments of division, heated debate, and even controversy. What is important to recognize is that we are all ignorant in some way, and it is our responsibility to learn where our blindspots are. By listening first and speaking second, we can understand opposing viewpoints even if we personally do not agree with them. I am a firm believer that sharing unconventional opinions can push us out of our comfort zones and teach us how to develop a more nuanced take on a topic. However, free expression should not be abused – especially when it is used to justify hatred and vitriol against already vulnerable and underrepresented identities. Hate speech and discrimination will not be tolerated in the Student Assembly.
Review: The Student Assembly recently made national headlines with Resolution 31: Mandating Content Warnings in the Classroom, which was rejected by President Pollack. Both of you voted for the resolution. After everything that has happened since, would you vote for it again, if given the chance today?
DeLorenzo: Remembering back to the day Resolution 31 was presented, I sat there, listening to the reason for its creation, and I began to empathize with the reasoning. A part of me knows how difficult it is for some students here at Cornell, however, as I began to consider it more, I realized there were logistical issues with mandating content warnings. For starters, even though some topics deserving of warnings were listed, what exactly encompasses everything that a student may be offended by and need a content warning for. For professors, this change would be incredibly terrifying once implemented because of the fear that if they missed a potential warning, they could be held accountable for this and receive a punishment. Further, the resolution pointed out that students should not be punished for missing material, but for professors who develop in-depth course plans, what constitutes appropriate materials that could be substituted in its place.
Although these thoughts were going through my mind at the time, because of the moral high ground being leveraged against assembly members in an attempt to pass it, I did not feel empowered at that time to express these concerns. Hypothetically, if I did bring these concerns up, I would then be challenged and shut down because this action would be seen as going against the moral status quo. While the issue that received the most attention was the limitation on academic free expression, I think a much bigger issue here is that out of everyone present at that meeting, a percentage of who had the same concerns that I did, felt empowered to speak up and challenge what they thought would cause issues because of the moral sentiment being used and repercussions from other members. All of this being said, after everything that happened, if given the chance today, I would still vote yes on it because the issue of free expression when challenging a viewpoint you disagree with, in order to open up potential dialogue has not been addressed here at Cornell, and to my knowledge, is only getting worse.
Ting: I would vote for it if it had stronger support from various constituency groups that are affected by the topic of the resolution. After an extensive conversation with the administration and ongoing discussion with faculty, we are looking for a better avenue to balance academic freedom with the needs of the student body rather than a mandate. I also believe that much of the media coverage has mischaracterized Resolution 31, who it is intended to affect, and the nature of the sponsors. Few sources have fairly presented the ongoing discussion surrounding classroom content with balanced perspectives, and even fewer have considered the ongoing middle-ground conversations and initiatives surrounding Resolution 31.
Finally, is there anything else you would like to tell the student body?
DeLorenzo: N/A
Ting: This campus is full of passionate, dedicated student leaders who are committed to making their communities a better place. Student Assembly is no different, and I think all the candidates can agree when we say that there’s always someone willing to help with a project, problem, or initiative.
