Kanuparthy and Horvath for the UC

A year ago, undergraduates chose a joke ticket to lead the Undergraduate Council, a rebuke for an organization that for too long had been seen as stilted and ineffective. But a year later, under the leadership of President Gus A. Mayopolous ’15 and Vice President Sietse K. Goffard ’15, the UC has become reinvigorated—it is both more relevant and relatable to students and increasingly combative with the administration on issues like club funding, summer storage, and the new sexual assault policy.

The task at hand for the next UC leaders is maintaining the positive momentum of the last year, by pressuring administrators and engaging students to achieve important, but realistic, goals. From our conversations with the candidates, we believe that Meghamsh Kanuparthy ’16 and Ema H. Horvath ’16 are best equipped for the task.

Unlike other UC campaigns past and present, theirs does not have an alliterative platform, a snazzy slogan, or Napoleonic costumes—but what it lacks in glamour, it makes up in substance.

Kanuparthy, a past UC secretary and current UC treasurer, was the single most impressive candidate, who gave consistently thoughtful and considerate answers to our questions. His platform of reforming funding for smaller student groups, instituting financial aid for student summer storage, and releasing plans for the Richard A. & Susan F. Smith Campus Center strikes a balance between importance to students and feasibility.

The opposing ticket made up of Ava Nazrollahzadeh ’16 and Dhruv P. Goyal ’16 certainly has considerable UC experience, but their platform is made up of little more than the usual crowd-pleasers like weekend brain break and not allowing midterms on housing day. Their proposal to solicit UC funds directly from alumni could also turn the focus of the council towards fundraising, rather than its more important mission of representing students.

Another ticket, made up of Happy Yang ’16 and Faith A. Jackson ’16, deserve credit for most cogently diagnosing the problem of the UC: it is “‘derpy’ in that it’s decentralized, it’s exclusive, the relevance is lacking, the power of change is unclear.” A chief proposal of theirs for a student multicultural center is ambitious, albeit one that seems highly unlikely.

A sophomore ticket of Luke R. Heine ’17 and Stephen A. Turban ’17, running on a platform of restoring UC funding of alcohol for student groups, made a remarkable showing of infiltrating 11 of the 13 undergraduate dining halls and replacing newsletters with ones containing their watermarked campaign message—but it remains unclear how their watermarking prowess will translate to benefits for Harvard students.

Whoever wins the UC election will need to ensure that administrators are pressured to respond to student concerns and that a new slate of fresh ideas are brought before their constituents. Kanuparthy and Horvath are the ones who best fit that bill.