The U.C.'s Future

"Democracy stands or falls on a mutual trust--government's trust of the people and the people's trust of the governments they elect."

--Vice President Al Gore '69, at the 1994 Harvard Commencement

Legitimacy. That's what the Undergraduate Council can have, if it holds true to the democratic principles that have guided its course this past year. The institution of campus-wide elections of the president and vice president, which occurred for the first time in April, and the adoption of the Nelson-Grimmelmann Act, which allows the council to submit legislation to the dean of the College for approval, have the potential to transform what was, at best, a glorified dance committee into a truly representative body capable of advocating student interests.

Student government at Harvard has long been plagued by electoral incest among the old boys who controlled the Undergraduate Council and the accompanying corruption. But we believe the accountability to which students can now hold council executives will endow those offices with a new credibility. Robert M. Hyman '98-'97, the newly inaugurated president, seems to understand that this new stature will be possible only if the council keeps student interests at heart. The "Students' Bill of Rights" which served as his campaign platform, accurately assesses the needs of undergraduates for the most part, even if it falsely couches our desires in the language of rights.

We call on Hyman's council to institute this campaign rhetoric. This means that we want a safer campus, and we expect the council both to pressure HUPD for improved security and to continue funding of Rape Aggression Defense classes. We want to have a decent education at this fine institution; the council should push for smaller sections and better-trained teaching fellows. We want to see better student services; the council must advocate more frequent shuttles, and there can be no negotiation. We want vibrant student organizations and independent house committees, which entails their receipt of an increased portion of council funds. We do not want to see an increase in the amount of student funds going to the council.

We want to see the institution of gender equality, and to that end, the council should focus attention on the safety and academic concerns of women on campus. We want to deal with competent advising, counseling and health care services, a demand that includes better and increased staffing. We want to retain our privacy in these areas; the council is right to insist on anonymous HIV testing, secure computer records and closed personal files. Finally, we want to see Harvard be socially responsible in its investments (get out of Nigeria!) and in its consumption (we hail Coke's return to soda machines).

How to? The council recently passed the Nelson-Grimmelmann Act to institutionalize the administrative approval process, but to this point has been a transparent ruse for administrative inaction. As the respect and concern given to students by Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 and his colleagues continues to decrease exponentially, it is encouraging to see the council acting as our advocate. We urge the council to use the Nelson-Grimmelmann act often and responsibly next year, forcing the administration to go on the record about these important student issues. Lewis' decisions should be exposed to public scrutiny.

The preamble to the Constitution of the Undergraduate Council reads: "We, the undergraduates of Harvard and Radcliffe colleges,...reconstitute an undergraduate government to represent student interests; to secure an active role for students in deciding official policies and priorities; to safeguard academic freedom and student rights and to affirm the student citizens' dignity and worth." Here, then, is the heart of the mission of our student government. The council must stand up for student interests, not as an appropriation of power from some other entity, but because if we do not give voice to our concerns, no one will care. The administration hardly gives a damn anyway.

The council's priorities must now and always be to make the College a bastion of comfortable learning for undergraduates. Students are not chattel. The administration cannot trough-feed us the Core or placate us with the Loker Commons. We believe in the strength and unity and goodness that an undergraduate community dedicated to a rigorous education and a moral responsibility can achieve. We believe in the power of democracy not simply as a balance of group interests but as a mechanism of fostering community. We believe that the council's purpose should be to uphold these beliefs, to fight for student concerns within the present system and to foster a future community which does not treat undergraduates as its Third Estate.