To the Editor,
The Post didn't do endorsements in student government elections once upon a time in the early 1960s. The idea was that it wouldn't be fair to the candidates for a newspaper subsidized by students generally to take sides in student elections. That policy was overturned and freedom of the press respected in time.
Currently, Student Senate is trying to restrict what someone or someones may spend in Student Senate elections, claiming the differences can be unfair. It seems they do not recognize a rule impairing how much someone may spend in an election as a law restraining freedom of speech.
Imagine an unendorsed candidate taking out a full page ad in The Post in response to the newspaper's endorsement. That ad might cost more than the amount Student Senate wants to allow. But the advertisement might help that candidate win the election.
The fun part begins after the election.
The Election Board disqualifies the candidate with the most votes from sitting on the Student Senate because he spent too much running for the office. That is an offense not just against the winning candidate, but the people who voted for him.
I submit that Senate has no more business limiting campaign spending than it would trying to revise the old policy against The Post endorsing candidates. We must recognize them for the restrictions on speech and the press that they are.
Kelley Walker is a 1980 Ohio University alumnus and a resident of Niles, Ohio
