Secret recordings. Dorm room visits. Arrests.

The ASUO elections have looked more like a poorly written episode of The West Wing or House of Cards than a student government affair. Ben Bowman and Thomas Tullis’ actions over the last few weeks have cast doubt on the legitimacy of the process.

It all started with a conversation in Tullis’ room in Riley Hall.

Bowman and two of his campaign fellows visited Tullis in the residence hall in an effort to dissuade the freshman from running. Tullis recorded the conversation without Bowman, Kosloff or Titus knowing — which could be a breach of Oregon state law.

Following the conversation, Tullis filed a grievance to the Constitution Court that got Bowman kicked off the Mighty Oregon platform’s presidential ticket. Bowman appealed the court’s decision, to no avail.

It was then that Bowman approached the university administration in an effort to overturn the Constitution Court’s decision. He succeeded.

Members of the Mighty Oregon slate were justifiably upset by the decision. Newly appointed presidential nominee Taylor Allison, previously Bowman’s running mate, had no say whatsoever in the administration’s decision to oust her from the top slot. She publicly asserted that she would not support Bowman as the Mighty Oregon presidential candidate. Again, rightfully so.

Members of the Elections Board began resigning left and right following Bowman’s reinstatement. We can’t blame them. After all, what’s the point of holding a student government position when your decisions are unilaterally reversed by the administration?

This is the second consecutive year that a university administrator has stepped in to address wrongdoing in ASUO elections. And every time the administration steps in, outcry from several members of student government follows. Not only does this raise questions of student autonomy, but it calls into question the purpose of bodies such as the Elections Board and Constitution Court. If either body’s decisions can be overturned so easily at the whim of a university administrator, what’s the point of appointing students to these positions? Why not just have an administrator play that role?

There needs to be greater collaboration between the ASUO and the university administration on disputes in the elections process. The current system isn’t working — a process in which the administration’s role in grievances is clearly outlined should be a priority for the incoming ASUO leadership. The next time there’s a dispute that involves the Constitution Court or Elections Board, the decision reached must be final, otherwise there is little purpose in appointing students to either body.

Bowman’s and Tullis’ actions, regardless of their legality, don’t instill trust in either the student body or other ASUO hopefuls. Both candidates’ behavior would make it difficult for anyone to work with them.

There’s no way either candidate would be able to effectively lead the student government given the lack of trust any reasonable person would have in Bowman or Tullis considering their actions.

And is the ASUO presidency really worth such high stakes? Tullis was arrested on Sunday because of his illegal acquisition of the recording. We sincerely hope the jail time was worth the opportunity to sit as the head of the UO’s student government for 12 months. On this end, it doesn’t seem as though the ticket is worth the price of admission.

Government already has a bad rap. Voters at the state, regional and national levels already hold visions of smoke-filled rooms, wiretapping and other seedy behavior as everyday occurrences in politics. Tullis and Bowman have reinforced that stereotype. Senators and executive members of the ASUO are, ostensibly, future leaders at the state and federal levels. Should this kind of behavior by public officials be rewarded or condoned? We don’t think so.

For the record, Bowman was once employed by The Emerald as its opinion editor. He was hired by the management team in May of 2013. His tenure ended shortly before the end of winter term 2014 when he decided to run for the ASUO presidency. Since then, Bowman has not influenced editorial decisions in any way whatsoever, contrary to what at least one party asserts in the leaked recording.

In the end, no one involved in the conversation at Riley Hall or the ensuing fallout comes out of this looking good. Bowman yelled at a freshman in his room with two upperclassmen campaign officials. Tullis illicitly recorded the conversation. Bowman’s inability to accept the Constitution Court’s decision and the subsequent appeal to the administration has left the ASUO without an Elections Board, effectively halting this year’s elections until a resolution is agreed upon.

At this juncture, there’s two possibilities: The Elections Board members who quit over the administration’s decision to reinstate Bowman may get to return to their positions and continue the process with a week’s delay. Or an entirely new board would need to be hired, a process that could take up to a month to complete.

The fate of this year’s ASUO elections is unclear because of two individuals acting in their own self interest. On top of that, members of the Mighty Oregon slate have every reason to run as independents because of the name’s association with the intimidating tactics Bowman employed and the ensuing fallout.

ASUO President Sam Dotters-Katz is also on the brink of calling for the formation of a new student government should the administration stand by its decision.

It shouldn’t be this easy to derail the democratic process. We can only hope that university administrators and the ASUO can come up with an agreement that will prevent this from happening in the future.