Quite the reformation you've got in mind there.

I tried to reform it one way, now I'm trying to reform it another.

Indeed this point can be seen quite eloquently put in Lysander Spooner's “No Treason” where the constitution of the United States can be viewed as a contract that binds future generations without their consent, and thus is not necessarily to be followed on the conventional authoritarian grounds.

That said, I don't really see your point. I view the institution of something like a student government as necessarily wrong as it involves unnecessitated involuntary action. Therefore, even if say the “process” of electing that apparatus were in some way justified, its continued existence would not be.

Let's say “most” is a majority of the population. So 51 voters, given the example above. Let's say the election presented two choices, A and B. Let's say that A received just a majority, 26 votes. So here, just little more than a quarter of the population actually made this decision for the remaining three-quarters. Legitimate?

But you never really answered my question. What percentage of the membership of ASUN needs to vote in any given election to make the authority of the officers who are elected at that election legitimate? How do you deal with the population that, for whatever reason, chooses to not vote? You can assume simple, direct democracies all you like, but you're rejecting the reality of what you're dealing when when you do so.

Based on your assumptions, ASUN should only be able to “tax” those who vote. Again, this rejects the coercive authority that is in place, through the Board of Regents.