IOP votes to Reduce Advisory Group Size

In a move that may be the first of several reforms at the Institute of Politics (IOP), the Student Advisory Committee (SAC) voted Sunday to gradually reduce its membership within the next three years.

The 27 members of SAC, which is the student governing body of the IOP, voted overwhelmingly in favor of reducing the number of members from a range of 25-30 to a range of 15-20, according to SAC chair Byron J. McLain '00.

Trevor D. Dryer '00-'02, who authored the proposal, said it is aimed at giving more responsibility to associates of the IOP. Associates do not hold voting privileges like SAC members.

"The idea of making SAC smaller is to give associates a greater chance to work on special projects that are now taken by SAC members and to give them a greater say in what goes on at the IOP," Dryer said.

McLain said a smaller SAC would de-emphasize the importance of being on the committee.

SAC Vice-Chair Curtis J. Mahoney '00 agreed, saying that reduced membership would make the IOP a more open environment for associates.

"It seems counter-intuitive that to open ourselves up we have to get smaller, but practically, when you have so much responsibility concentrated in the higher ranks, it turns people away," Mahoney said.

SAC member Joseph N. Sanberg '01 said the proposal "sends the message that you can be active and take on leadership roles without being on SAC."

Members also said they believe a smaller SAC will make for a more effective governing body.

SAC member and Editor-in-Chief of the Harvard Political Review John D. Couriel '00 emphasized that a committee of 30 people has complicated the decision-making processes in the past.

"We passed the plan to make SAC more manageable," Couriel said, "Simply put, we cannot continue taking 11 people each year. It makes the [governing] body unwieldy."

SAC member and Communications Chair Shafeeqa T. Watkins '01 had initial concerns before supporting the proposal, but sees it as a move toward further improvements.

"This [plan] puts forth a new vision. I think it might spur some more discussion. We're always trying to improve ourselves," Watkins said.

The reform comes almost a year after several IOP associates proposed a structural change to SAC.

SAC came under criticism from students last year when it voted down a petition to extend voting privileges to associates.

Kathryn R. Markham '99-'00 was one of 23 associates to sign the petition. She told The Crimson in December 1998 that the request to enfranchise the associates was "not unreasonable, particularly in an organization designed to foster participation in a democratic political system."

Markham, who is no longer involved with the IOP, said she was uncertain about whether limiting SAC membership would increase associate participation.

"It would be nice if associates were more involved, but I'm not sure whether this is the way to do it," Markham said.

She pointed out that the reform does nothing to give voting privileges to the associates within the organization.

"SAC members were presented with a very unambiguous option to integrate the associates as real members of the organization last year. I was very sorry that they chose not to do it," Markham said.

Mahoney argued that the recently passed proposal will be a more effective way to open the organization to associates.

"A lot of us [last year] felt that just giving someone a vote didn't translate into making the organization a more open place," Mahoney said.

SAC member Hannah Choi '01 said she saw the current reform as one that has a different purpose from extending voting privileges to associates.

"[Sunday's] proposal needs to be seen in light of the new direction and new leadership that's coming in," Choi said.

Several other concerns were raised last year, most prominently about an exclusive nature and lack of diversity on SAC.

McLain, who expressed initial concerns about maintaining diversity in a smaller committee , said he has been reassured by SAC's commitment to the goal of diversity.

"I was happy to hear SAC as a body commit to diversity," McLain said, "That's something that I'm really committed to."

SAC members who voted for the proposition say that reducing the number of SAC members will in no way promote exclusive privileges for SAC members or discourage diversity on the committee.

"Membership in SAC does not provide a person with any exclusive benefits. In the year that I've been involved with the IOP, I have not been to any event that an associate could not attend," Robert F. McCarthy '02, SAC internships chair said.

McCarthy agreed that there will not be a negative effect on either diversity or representation.

" SAC will continue to represent a wide cross-section of the student body, including members from various backgrounds, ethnicities, ideologies and genders," McCarthy said.

Dryer said the committee's vote in favor of the proposal bodes well for future reforms.

"I think this is a first step in a series of changes that hopefully we'll see at IOP this year," Dryer added.

"This [plan] puts forth a new vision. I think it might spur some more discussion. We're always trying to improve ourselves," Watkins said.

The reform comes almost a year after several IOP associates proposed a structural change to SAC.

SAC came under criticism from students last year when it voted down a petition to extend voting privileges to associates.

Kathryn R. Markham '99-'00 was one of 23 associates to sign the petition. She told The Crimson in December 1998 that the request to enfranchise the associates was "not unreasonable, particularly in an organization designed to foster participation in a democratic political system."

Markham, who is no longer involved with the IOP, said she was uncertain about whether limiting SAC membership would increase associate participation.

"It would be nice if associates were more involved, but I'm not sure whether this is the way to do it," Markham said.

She pointed out that the reform does nothing to give voting privileges to the associates within the organization.

"SAC members were presented with a very unambiguous option to integrate the associates as real members of the organization last year. I was very sorry that they chose not to do it," Markham said.

Mahoney argued that the recently passed proposal will be a more effective way to open the organization to associates.

"A lot of us [last year] felt that just giving someone a vote didn't translate into making the organization a more open place," Mahoney said.

SAC member Hannah Choi '01 said she saw the current reform as one that has a different purpose from extending voting privileges to associates.

"[Sunday's] proposal needs to be seen in light of the new direction and new leadership that's coming in," Choi said.

Several other concerns were raised last year, most prominently about an exclusive nature and lack of diversity on SAC.

McLain, who expressed initial concerns about maintaining diversity in a smaller committee , said he has been reassured by SAC's commitment to the goal of diversity.

"I was happy to hear SAC as a body commit to diversity," McLain said, "That's something that I'm really committed to."

SAC members who voted for the proposition say that reducing the number of SAC members will in no way promote exclusive privileges for SAC members or discourage diversity on the committee.

"Membership in SAC does not provide a person with any exclusive benefits. In the year that I've been involved with the IOP, I have not been to any event that an associate could not attend," Robert F. McCarthy '02, SAC internships chair said.

McCarthy agreed that there will not be a negative effect on either diversity or representation.

" SAC will continue to represent a wide cross-section of the student body, including members from various backgrounds, ethnicities, ideologies and genders," McCarthy said.

Dryer said the committee's vote in favor of the proposal bodes well for future reforms.

"I think this is a first step in a series of changes that hopefully we'll see at IOP this year," Dryer added.

"[Sunday's] proposal needs to be seen in light of the new direction and new leadership that's coming in," Choi said.

Several other concerns were raised last year, most prominently about an exclusive nature and lack of diversity on SAC.

McLain, who expressed initial concerns about maintaining diversity in a smaller committee , said he has been reassured by SAC's commitment to the goal of diversity.

"I was happy to hear SAC as a body commit to diversity," McLain said, "That's something that I'm really committed to."

SAC members who voted for the proposition say that reducing the number of SAC members will in no way promote exclusive privileges for SAC members or discourage diversity on the committee.

"Membership in SAC does not provide a person with any exclusive benefits. In the year that I've been involved with the IOP, I have not been to any event that an associate could not attend," Robert F. McCarthy '02, SAC internships chair said.

McCarthy agreed that there will not be a negative effect on either diversity or representation.

" SAC will continue to represent a wide cross-section of the student body, including members from various backgrounds, ethnicities, ideologies and genders," McCarthy said.

Dryer said the committee's vote in favor of the proposal bodes well for future reforms.

"I think this is a first step in a series of changes that hopefully we'll see at IOP this year," Dryer added.