Tuesday, delegates from around the country experienced a new method of voting for Third Committee. Last year, Third Committee entailed ballot voting after each proposal, much like First and Second committee this year.

The new model implemented this year was based on a ranking system. At the end of the day, each proposal author was allotted a 30-second speech to refresh the delegates’ memories of arguments made in debate throughout the day. The delegates then ranked each proposal on a scale of 1 to 20.



Isaac Kim and Ansel Herrera-Garcia

Not all delegates voted “yea” for this policy. Isaac Kim, a delegate from Washington, said many delegates just went through and assigned numbers to the proposals with no regard to merit. Missouri delegate Ansel Herrera-Garcia said the number of proposals that needed to be ranked made ranking each thoughtfully difficult.

Caroline Borja, Maryland

Caroline Borja

On the other hand, Caroline Borja of Maryland, said she was a fan: “I personally liked it because I was able to decide who I wanted to see in General Assembly and Plenary, based on which proposals I thought were interesting. I considered some of the ideas more important or some of the speeches more powerful that I wanted everyone to see, rather than exactly the most feasible or the most original,” she said. Borja did say many were unsure of the guidelines on which the proposals were to be ranked.

In the end, many excellent proposals moved forward to General Assembly and Plenary, where the voting system is pass or fail with delegates standing up to vote either yea or nay for any certain proposal.

By Beth Walker, NM