Any contested election stirs passions. Refusal to sling mud or make up stories about oneâÄôs opponent, however, is a sign of a mature, rational candidate. In the Graduate and Professional Student Association presidential race, there is only one of those: Paul Freeman.
FreemanâÄôs opponent, Abou Amara, has been spreading false stories about him, hoping to gain votes through deception and fear. Amara has told students that Freeman wants to use GAPSAâÄôs resources to lobby the state Legislature for a union-busting bill like WisconsinâÄôs and has been attaching unapproved draft minutes from a Public Affairs Committee meeting as evidence.
The claim itself is laughable. Of the two candidates, Amara is the one pushing for GAPSA to use its limited resources for extensive, ineffective lobbying. Freeman, on the other hand, wants GAPSA to focus on fixing its organizational problems, provide services to students and advocate for them on campus.
The context of FreemanâÄôs statement in the meeting (which I attended), which is absent from the unapproved minutes, was an illustration of AmaraâÄôs ever-changing definition of what was âÄúwithin the scope of GAPSA.âÄù When it fits AmaraâÄôs personal agenda, it is âÄúwithin the scope.âÄù
Freeman disagrees with such an abuse of presidential power and used an extreme example to make a point. Freeman does not want to use GAPSA resources to lobby against unions, and AmaraâÄôs claim that he does is baseless, deceptive and unprofessional. Amara wants to win the election, but if he canâÄôt win on his own merits, then he doesnâÄôt deserve it.