Every year, Loyola students scroll past Student Government Association election posts, ignore voting emails, and treat the entire process like background noise. It blends into the noise of notifications, club announcements, and campus flyers. Easy to skip. Easy to forget. And every year, participation reflects that same level of indifference.

But here’s the reality: when students choose not to engage, they’re not just opting out of an election, they’re opting out of having a say in the decisions that shape their daily lives on campus.

SGA elections are often dismissed as insignificant. Something that exists, but doesn’t really matter. But that assumption misses the point entirely. SGA is one of the few direct lines students have to influence real, tangible decisions at Loyola, everything from how student organizations are funded, to what events are supported, to how student concerns are communicated to administration.

Whether students realize it or not, SGA plays a role in shaping what campus life actually looks like. And yet, participation remains extremely inconsistent.

Recent election data shows just how much turnout fluctuates: 425 voters in 2020–21, 337 in 2022–23, a sharp drop to 92 in 2023–24, then a rebound to 292 in 2024–25, followed by 241 this year. These numbers don’t point to a steady level of engagement, they point to unpredictability. While there are moments of recovery, turnout has not returned to its earlier peak. The issue isn’t just how many students vote, it’s the lack of sustained, consistent participation across the student body.

So why does this keep happening?

Part of the issue is awareness. Many students simply don’t know when elections are happening or don’t feel informed enough about candidates to make a decision. But awareness alone doesn’t explain everything. There’s also a deeper disconnect between students and what SGA represents. When students don’t clearly see how SGA affects their experience, participation starts to feel optional, something extra, rather than something essential.

SGA serves as the primary bridge between students and university administration. It allocates funding to student organizations, supports campus programming, and advocates for improvements to student resources and services. The events students attend, the clubs that receive funding, and even certain policy changes often pass through SGA in some form. Its impact might not always be obvious, but it is constant.

Still, many students fall into the habit of assuming their participation won’t really make a difference. That mindset is exactly what keeps engagement inconsistent. When turnout varies this much, elections are often decided by a relatively small group of students. Instead of reflecting the broader Loyola community, outcomes end up shaped by whoever happened to show up. Over time, this creates a gap between student leadership and the student body itself, not because SGA lacks influence, but because participation is limited and that gap has consequences.

A campus where only a fraction of students participate in elections sends a message. It suggests that student voices are disengaged, that input is limited, and that broader student opinion is harder to measure. When that perception takes hold, it becomes more difficult to push for changes, advocate for new initiatives, or hold leadership accountable. SGA leadership is aware of this challenge and has taken steps to increase engagement. Outreach efforts like social media campaigns and tabling aim to make elections more visible. There’s a push to simplify the voting process, encourage more students to run for office, and create more competitive races that generate interest. As current SGA president Nicolas Keen said this year, there’s also been a focus on incentives tied to the student experience, including larger campus events like Crawfish in the Quad, along with quicker turnaround on election results to keep students engaged.

These efforts matter, but they can only go so far. At some point, participation has to come from students themselves.

“For students who believe their vote does not matter, the reality is quite the opposite,” Keen said.  

He added that turnout is relatively low and how each individual vote carries even more weight. 

“Elections can be decided by small margins, meaning that a single vote can have a meaningful impact. Choosing not to vote ultimately leaves decisions in the hands of a small portion of the student body, while participating ensures that a broader range of voices is represented,” he said.  

Voting in SGA elections isn’t just about selecting candidates. It’s about deciding whether you want a role, however small, in shaping your college experience. It requires engagement. It requires showing up. Whether students participate or not, decisions are still being made. The only question is who those decisions represent and if they want to be part of that.

If students want better dining options, more funding for organizations, improved campus policies, or stronger advocacy on issues that matter to them, those demands have to be backed by participation. Voting is one of the simplest, most accessible ways to make that happen.

At the end of the day, SGA will continue to operate, allocate funding, and represent student interests.

The question is whether that representation reflects the student body, or just the portion of it that chose to engage. So vote. Not because it’s required, not because it’s convenient, but because it’s one of the clearest ways to make sure your perspective is part of the conversation.

And if students continue to treat it like background noise, they shouldn’t be surprised when their voices fade into the background.