From midnight to midnight on April 17, the student body had the opportunity to vote on three proposed amendments to the Student Union Constitution. The first proposal passed with 67.74 percent of voters in favor and the second proposal passed with 87.62 percent of voters in favor, but the third proposal did not pass, with only 34.04 percent of voters in favor of the amendment.

The first proposal sought to eliminate the instant run-off voting system. The instant run-off system involves ranking candidates for position, while the proposed system would involve selecting only one candidate per seat.

Union President Todd Kirkland '13 said he is content with the results, which allowed the Union to implement the new voting system via Brandeis' survey software, Qualtrics, in the first round of voting for Student Union positions on Thursday. "There is nothing wrong in theory of an instant run-off system, but the complexity added to interpreting results made it very difficult for both current and past Chief[s] of Elections to report the results with 100 [percent] accuracy," wrote Kirkland in an email to the Justice.

Controversy regarding the initial implementation of the first amendment proposal occurred last Thursday, due to the fact that Union Secretary Carlton Shakes '14 sent the Qualtrics poll for the first round of elections for Union positions in an email to students prior to sending the results of the constitutional amendment proposal polls. The voting system sent out for the first round of elections, which included Union president, vice president and other prominent positions, did not utilize the instant run-off system.

However, according to Kirkland, Shakes had certified the results of the amendment changes prior to sending out the email, allowing students to vote in the first round of elections. "I sent out the Qualtrics email after he certified the results.  Meanwhile, he was drafting the email to the Student Body alerting them of the results," wrote Kirkland. Kirkland stated that the delay in sending out the results was due to the fact that Shakes had lost Internet access and that Kirkland himself was on a flight; therefore, his wireless Internet access was inconsistent.

However, questions were raised by students regarding whether or not the Union had a plan for the first round of elections if the first amendment proposal had not passed, due to the fact that BigPulse, the original software that utilized the instant run-off system, was not going to be used.

"[W]e found a way to create a more manual run-off system using Qualtrics, so we did not have to bear any cost using Big Pulse," wrote Kirkland. According to Kirkland, BigPulse costs about $2,500 per year.

According to Kirkland, the Qualtrics instant run-off option would have been a more manual process, but would have been possible to send to students.

In addition, students raised questions regarding the legitimacy of the results of the first round of elections due to the change in wording of the first amendment proposal. The proposal had initially called for a majority; however, with several candidates up for each position, the wording was changed to indicate that a plurality was required to win. Majority implies that over 50 percent of students voted for one individual, while plurality implies that an individual received the largest amount of votes.

"When Carlton and I presented our amendment to [the] [S]enate we described it as a plurality/simple majority system. I remember a senator pointing out that we were using inconsistent wording and we clarified saying that yes we meant plurality, not majority. We changed the wording before sending it out to the union and union media, but we attached the wrong version," wrote Kirkland.

The second proposal sought to add instructions for special elections, specifically since ties leading to special elections would be more common when eliminating the instant run-off system. The election was passed with 87.62 percent of voters in favor.

The third amendment proposal was brought to the Union by Class of 2013 Senator David Fisch and the Ways and Means Committee, and sought to add requirements to run for president or vice president of the Union.

The amendment would have required students running for president to have served on the Student Union for at least one year. Similarly, students would have to have served on the Executive Board, Senate or a Senate committee to run for vice president.

The amendment did not pass, with only 34.04 percent of voters in favor of the amendment.

Although Fisch was disappointed that the amendment did not pass, he acknowledged that it was the student body's decision.

"My one issue was that I wish I outlined how little commitment my amendment still asked people to show to run for President or VP.  To run for President, all I asked for was commitment to any part of the Union," wrote Fisch in an email to the Justice. "I think that most people think that that meant only senators or F Board/E Board could run but it meant that anyone on any committee that is under the Union could run (and there are a TON of Union committees)."

On the Student Union website, 24 University committees are listed. Of the 24, about 14 have noted a limit to the number of students on those respective committees.

Kirkland, however, stated he was glad the amendment had not passed.

"Although it is beneficial for someone to have [U]nion experience, I do believe that there is great potential in having someone without [U]nion experience running for Student Union President or Vice President," wrote Kirkland.

A poll to collect student opinions on divestment will be included in the second round of elections from midnight to midnight on Thursday. In addition, the vote for the proposed amendment to secure the Brandeis Academic Speech and Debate Society will take place from midnight to midnight next Monday.