The unsigned editorial is the opinion of Technician’s editorial board and is the responsibility of the editor-in-chief.

The 105th session of NC State’s Student Government is already shaping up to be one of the most consequential in recent years. The next session will establish the Student Government’s relationship with the new chancellor and set the course for how organizations supporting diversity, equity and inclusion on campus will survive President Donald Trump’s dismantling of DEI initiatives.

It is with these key issues in mind that Technician’s editorial board endorses Taquan Dewberry and Adam Womble for the 2025-2026 student body president and vice president.

To begin, Dewberry and Womble’s platform is more specific in establishing an unwavering commitment to NC State students regarding interactions with University administration.

During the Student Government debates on Monday and in their administration’s platform, the pair proposed feasible methods to navigate a potential loss of funding for DEI-related organizations on campus. With these programs and resources being stripped by the federal government, Technician respects Dewberry’s commitment to allocating additional funding for student organizations impacted by such attacks.

In contrast, Carreno was adamant during the debate that he would approach DEI issues by adhering to a philosophy of “strategic advocacy” for students, suggesting he was more qualified to do so due to his experience in the General Assembly and White House. We find this response to be an empty solution to the student body’s genuine concerns.

In the end, Carreno’s platform was generic and failed to distinguish himself from his predecessor and former running mate — current student body president Allison Markert — or her predecessor and former running mate — former student body president Timothy Reid — whom we feel have both been disappointing leaders of NC State’s student body.

Carreno represents another link in this long line of Student Government leadership that has failed to properly represent and support the student body. So though we are not ecstatic to endorse Dewberry, he represents a clear departure from years of ineffective and artificial leadership.

In the debate, Dewberry also advocated for student progress by stating that Student Government has too often taken a stance of neutrality with its relationship to the chancellor.

With a new chancellor on the horizon, the Student Government’s relationship with the new leader of our University must be one in which our representatives can take a stand on the student body’s behalf. Given that the student body president works directly with the chancellor in many ways, including sitting on the Board of Trustees, we value a SBP who will uplift and promote the student voice unapologetically, and Dewberry demonstrates that potential.

In the debate, Dewberry stated that making sure “the will of the student body is the will of the Student Government” would be his mindset should he encounter a controversy similar to Markert’s veto of Resolution 29, a resolution calling for a ceasefire in the Israel-Hamas war and a divestment of University funds from Israel.

As such, we believe the Dewberry-Womble administration would be committed to prioritizing student voices in a promising way Carreno’s platform does not make room for.

We acknowledge the ethical concerns surrounding Dewberry’s undisclosed meeting regarding the R29 bill — an issue we still struggle to overlook. While we do not condone the actions taken by Dewberry, we recognize his remorse and his eventual votes in favor of the resolution and in favor of overriding Markert’s veto. Additionally, we recognize Dewberry took these actions during his first year in Student Government, and inexperience undoubtedly leads to missteps.

However, we have concerns regarding both tickets’ promotion of a transactional relationship between Student Government and Student Media. In a post-debate interview with Technician, Dewberry recognized Student Media’s capacity to hold Student Government accountable; however, he still seems to misunderstand the dynamics between the two organizations.

“I think what we need to do is strengthen Student Media and utilize Student Media as the resource that it is to promote what we’re doing to our student body,” Dewberry said.

We are an independent organization and can’t be “utilized” by Student Government. We don’t “promote” the actions of Student Government, we report on them, and we will continue to do so regardless of which candidates are elected.

Dewberry’s platform calls for a “mutually-beneficial relationship” between Student Government and Student Media. We find this phrasing naive, at best, as Technician doesn’t plan to be an ally but a separate entity with the same goal of prioritizing and representing student voices through accurate, responsible journalism.

We take issue with both campaigns’ discussion of sexual assault, deeming each ill-informed and incapable of acknowledging the realities of survivors — who are not just women. Their comments appeared to be more about merely checking a box by mentioning women in their respective platforms rather than addressing the real issues that impact them or even seeking to understand what those issues are at all.

We are disappointed by the insistence of both candidates to act like a politician due to some misguided conceptualization that it makes them appear more like leaders. We are all students and would be best represented by someone who acted like a regular person, not someone auditioning for a post-grad internship in D.C. This would have eased concerns about both candidates’ commitment to transparency and the sincerity of their messages, and have made our decision much easier.

The editorial board deliberated extensively before reaching a consensus on its endorsement for student body president, but our choice for student senate president was much clearer.

Naila Din earns our enthusiastic endorsement for student senate president given her longstanding commitment to transparency and track record of introducing, supporting and fighting for legislation that supports and uplifts students.

Din spoke with Technician regarding Dewberry’s undisclosed meeting preceding R29’s failed fast-track. This action showcased her dedication to keeping the student body informed and holding Student Government members accountable — a rarity from NC State’s elected students in recent years.

Her potential involvement in this role would ease our reservations about Dewberry’s track record with transparency if he prevails in the election.

Lance Williams is our clear choice for student body treasurer. A crucial aspect of the student body treasurer debate was the need for increased funding for student organizations. Williams is the only candidate who offered tangible solutions in making minimal yet impactful increases in student fees by less than a dollar and streamlining the application process. Bring home the bacon, Lance.

As a student publication with the responsibility of informing the student body through journalism as a public service, we do not take our decisions on endorsements lightly.

Our student body is currently experiencing an unprecedented attack on higher education and, at the same time, we are introducing a new chancellor. The approach our student representatives take will define how DEI values are supported on our campus and construct the student body’s relationship with the new chancellor, and we encourage students to consider these issues when casting their votes.

Voting for the election is open March 3 and 4. To vote, head to getinvolved.ncsu.edu.