Candidates emphasized transparency and efficiency, while one presidential contender drew backlash for critiquing opponents during closing remarks.
Last Monday, Student Government Association candidates convened for the 2026 SGA Executive Debate. Running unopposed, candidate for secretary Zac Edwards said he hoped to complete his tasks in a “clean, quick, fast, and efficient” manner.
Also unopposed for treasurer, Reagan McComas described a possible open budget with emphasis on positive student organization experience. Ella Hampton, Lilly Wilsterman, Archit Dash and Parker Wheeler make up the candidates for vice president, while Aristotle Orsini, Bruce Bigler, Jake Stalb, Beckham Schell and Harish Vaithianathan are campaigning for president.* Notably, Schell is this year’s vice president.
When asked to share their visions, candidates echoed each other, noting that “transparency” and “efficiency” needed to be improved on. Even Wheeler, who was not able to attend the debate, submitted similar responses via prerecorded video. He acknowledged that transparency has become something of a “buzzword,” but promised to make SGA transparent through accessibility.
On Thursday, a few days after the debate, Wilsterman expressed that she wished she could have communicated more of what she “really wanted to implement. A lot of the questions kind of all had the same answer. But I appreciate that everyone was respectful, and that at our core we really all want to make the same improvements.”
Wilsterman hopes that, among other duties, the future vice president’s role as a facilitator will help Senate meetings resolve faster. “When we’re staying past midnight on a regular basis, and our meetings are theoretically supposed to get done at 11 [p.m], it can be really hard. We’re students,” she said. “I have exams [the next day].”
Frustrations that begin internally, within the Senate, limit the quality of work done externally. Compounding the issue, much of the student body does not understand what the student government actually does, limiting both engagement and meaningful impact.
Presidential candidate, Harish Vaithianathan campaigning ahead of this week’s election. Photo by Olive Clay
Presidential hopeful Vaithianathan raised an additional concern regarding the overall transparency of student government. “We should be here for student voices, and that priority got lost somewhere,” he stated. “A lot of work with admin started being less student focused.” He did not provide concrete examples, but mentioned financial troubles and the reputation of university administration, especially in the past year.
Vaithianathan made controversial statements during closing arguments, in what he claimed was an attempt to emphasize the importance of transparency, even during the election process. In a statement to The Collegian he said, “My statements will not change my campaign. I’m just trying to keep people informed … I didn’t attack their character, but rather the public actions they have taken.”
He faced backlash from opponents concerning the factual nature of his statements, and because by critiquing each candidate at the conclusion of the debate, Vaithianathan guaranteed no one was able to respond. Orsini later used Instagram to clarify his stance on alleged discriminatory language.
Schell later also made a statement on the matter. Photo courtesy of @bschell5 on Instagram
*To get to know the presidential candidates, read this SGA spotlight.
