White's Diatribe Was Vague and False

Brad White's recent diatribe against the Undergraduate Council could have benefited greatly from even the slightest bit of research. Instead, he offers only vague generalities, unsubstantiated claims, and illogical conclusions.

First, White accuses the UC of gross financial misconduct. This assertion is made with little evidence. For the record, the current Council has a budget of about $146,000. Of this amount, almost $83,000 will be disbursed to over 100 campus organizations. Without these generous funds from the UC many of these groups could not even exist, or they would not be able to plan as many events as they do now. If. White considers this appropriation "the waste of another large chunk of the [money] which the council controls this year," then I will personally give him the phone numbers of the heads of every student group that receives money from the UC so that he can substantiate this frivolous claim.

Also, his comments concerning the UC's "myriad of hopeless concerts" suggest that he doesn't even read the very newspaper for which he writes. Over the past year and a half, The Crimson has reported on several successful social events sponsored by the UC including the recent "Evening of Comedy Concert" which entertained several hundred Harvardians. Instead of reflecting on the current UC, White's article seems much better suited for a Crimson editorial page from two or three years ago. If anything, he should be praising the current council for learning from its past mistakes.

He also accuses the UC of trapping itself in a vicious cycle of scandal after scandal. The easiest reply to this charge is that it is very difficult to take it seriously from a writer for a newspaper which embroiled itself for several months in an almost childish dispute over whether or not the president of the publication would have to remove his shirt to get his own chair back from a group of writers. Lest I be confused for White, I will not resort to this easy cheap shot. Instead, let me say that the recent controversy over the results of the UC Vice-Presidential election were anything but scandalous. The disagreement was a genuine dispute over the nature of parliamentary procedure. To its credit, the UC labored over this decision for several hours before reaching a democratic conclusion.

Finally, White's most serious charge is that the UC does not represent the interests of the students of campus. Again, had he interviewed even one member of the UC he would have discovered that the current plans of the Council fit quite well with student needs. Buses to Yale, a tailgate at The Game, change machines in the laundry rooms, cable TV in the dorms and houses, longer hours for campus libraries, flexible meal plans, and a large festival in the Yard are only a portion of what the Council expects to accomplish this year. Is White trying to tell students that they do not want things such as longer library hours? Clearly, then, the UC does not represent the interests of the student body.

White's disdain for the UC is only surpassed by his disdain for employing the usual conventions of journalism, especially research. A more reliable way to find out what the UC is doing on behalf of the students is to talk with your representatives or to come to an actual UC meeting on Sundays at 7:00 in Harvard 104. Josh Liston '95   Co-Chair, U.C. Campus Life Committee