Student Government’s spring 2026 election results indicate that undergraduate votership has been decreasing dramatically, from 3,424 votes in 2019 to just 754 voters this year. That amounts to just 2.5% of the student body, which as of fall 2025 was 30,139. This is the lowest recorded turnout in SG election history.
Voter demographics also varied between schools, with 5.49% of students in the School of Economic, Political and Policy Sciences voting, the highest rate overall. Meanwhile, only 1.25% of Engineering and Computer Science students voted in this year’s election. The lowest single group in this election cycle was graduate students, only 0.9% of whom voted in the election.
“EPPS students are very politically engaged and civically minded,” political science professor and initiative for civic leadership director Amanda Clark said. “So they would know more about student government and government structures in general.”
The EPPS lead over other schools becomes much smaller when looking at the raw voter count. In total, 69 EPPS students voted this year compared to 101 ECS students. Of a little over 7,200 graduate students, only 68 voted.
In general, most schools have few voters. Only 33 students out of 978 students in the Interdisciplinary Studies school voted, meaning 33 students decided who would represent their entire school as a senator.
SG’s voter base makeup is correspondingly different from the total undergraduate makeup. While undergraduate student voters not classified under one of the seven schools, such as those with undeclared majors, are 1.22% of the undergraduate population, they make up around 14.85% of the voter base. On the other hand, ECS, which makes up around 31.43% of the school population, is only around 13.4% of the voter base.
EPPS has consistently had a higher voter percentage than other departments in previous years despite decreased voter turnout, from 16.27% in 2024 to 5.49% in 2026, as compared to ECS’ fourfold plunge from 5.21% in 2024 to 1.25% in 2026.
“People just don’t feel like they’re being spoken to,” Clark said. “[Voting] is something that takes time. People decide not to engage, or they have been engaged in the past and haven’t seen changes in a quick manner and become disillusioned with the whole process.”
SG doesn’t collect other demographic data — such as student status, information on scholarships, or honors — from voters, so it’s unclear how UTD’s other demographics are represented in the voter base.
“Most student governments model their ballots after public elections, where collecting race, gender, or age directly on a ballot is illegal or heavily restricted,” Student Government President Giana Abraham said. “While SG isn’t a government, advisors and student leaders worry that asking for demographic data on the ballot itself could suppress turnout because students might feel tracked. It could also create distrust since even if anonymity is promised, not everyone will believe it.”
Abraham stated that low voter turnout in SG elections has real consequences for the organization. When students don’t vote for their representatives, officials are added by SG mid-year through the appointment process. When these officials are appointed late, there are barriers for effective leadership due to missing key events, trainings and decisions such as those that pertain to the SG budget.
The Retrograde spoke to various students who did not vote, who stated they didn’t know that SG elections were happening, or they weren’t aware of or interested in SG’s impact around campus.
“To increase votership turnout, we should make sure that Student Government is well defined, and make those connections more clear,” Clark said. “For example, getting on the ground and speaking with departments such as ECS or NSM to get them more engaged. [That’s] the best way to get people to buy in, because now you’re talking to them about something they care about, and you’re making that connection to why the vote matters, because it goes back to something that really affects you personally.”
Other student elections have seen low voter turnouts too. Notably, GSA’s election turnout in 2025 was 3.9%, the single lowest voter turnout recorded since its conception. This is in contrast to the state primary elections, where UTD students voted at much higher rates.
Overall, the ways in which faculty and students can impact university decisions have become more limited. The Academic Senate previously allowed faculty to work with students and the university administration to make changes to academic policies and curricula, but this was dissolved just last year. These growing restrictions may also influence lessening interest or trust in student governance.
“Voting doesn’t take long, especially in the Student Government elections,” Abraham said. “During the election, SG elections board could also ask professors in large, low-turnout colleges for two minutes before lecture to speak on the election. I think there is overall just not much knowledge or student investment in elections on our stem-heavy campus as it stands.”
One Comment
this was a hard read