Why? Because status quo-controlled administrators and board members were too chicken to take an honest look at the reforms championed by reformist-minded elected alums.
In a letter to the Dartmouth community, Board Chair Edward Haldeman claims the half-century-old, competitive election process had become “increasingly politicized, costly, and divisive.”
In reality, he and his colleagues simply couldn’t stand the growing debate about limits on free speech and weakening undergraduate education at the college. So they shut down the electoral means that would have enabled such a debate.
In the end it will be Dartmouth that pays the price for their cowardice.