The first Government of the Student Body meeting of the year began with a debate on spending limits for election campaigns after the Senate voted and failed to override President Hillary Kletscher’s veto.

Kletscher vetoed a bill that was passed at the end of the fall session, which would allow candidates for the GSB presidential elections to spend as much money as they want on their campaigns. Kletscher said she believes having the previous cap of $1,250 would allow for a fair competition.

Kletscher said she had heard from a student that “they think how much money someone spends on a campaign matters because at the end of the day it matters who presents themselves the best.”

The amount of money students are able to spend directly impacts how they are allowed to present themselves, Kletscher said. She said she also has heard of students at the University of Kansas and the University of West Virginia spend $15,000 to $20,000 on their campaigns, using free food and extravagant campaigning techniques to garner votes.

“I believe that would truly happen to be competitive over the long term,” Kletscher said. “Do we really have the students in mind or do we have our own political agendas in mind?”

Kletscher said she doesn’t want to see any Iowa State students take out another student loan to spend money on campaigns, especially considering the average amount of debt with which students already graduate.

Some senators said if students want to waste money on campaigns that is their decision. Some students may be able to afford to spend thousands, while some students may not be able to spend more than $100 and have to fundraise for their campaigns. Whether students can spend a little or a lot of money on campaigns doesn’t mean they will get more or less votes.

Sen. Richard Hartnett gave the example of Karl Rove, who spent $10 million sponsoring Congressional elections in 2010 and garnered less than one percent more votes. Hartnett said students should have the opportunity to make their own financial decisions, believes those who are willing to do anything to win are the ones he wants to see serve the student body.

Sen. Peter Benzoni said he thinks candidates would quickly spend more money than they could afford because they would count on making up for costs through the scholarship that is provided to the president of GSB.

“We want someone who is competitive, not so competitive that they will do anything to win. We want a collaborative president, someone who’s willing to work with people, not against them,” Benzoni said.

Hartnett said the fact that some wanted a cap because it would be fair for all students to run is a false hope and that there are many disadvantages or advantages students will have between each other.

“Not everybody is equal in status when they are born. In the capitalistic nature of the society we live in, some people can afford to have smartphones and some people can only buy flip phones or can’t afford to have phones at all. Shouldn’t you remove that too because I have an unfair capability over someone else who can’t afford to have a smartphone?” Hartnett said about using his phone as a campaign tool.

Kletscher said that she was glad there was a cap when she was campaigning.

“I bought some votes last year. I did,” Kletscher said. “I had people tell me, ‘oh you bought me candy. You gave me hot chocolate.’ I personally could have spent more than the spending limits on my campaign. But because it was there it allowed me to make smarter financial decisions and do what was best for the Government of the Student Body.”

The override failed to pass, and there is a spending limit of $1250 on GSB campaigns.