Few Sparks Fly at Council Debate

Amidst a sea of campaign supporters--some sporting yellow bandanas in solidarity with their candidates--contenders for the Undergraduate Council's presidency and vice presidency held forth on old-standby issues of student voice and council legitimacylast night.

There was almost no direct confrontation between candidates at the debate, as they articulated their own platforms but never commented on their opponents'.

Throughout the hour-and-a-half forum, which was split evenly between the vice presidential and presidential debates, candidates charged that the University administration has largely ignored the lives of its undergraduates.

"The recent renovations to the Memorial Hall tower are evidence of the fact that the University is spending all around us," said council Treasurer Sterling P. A. Darling '01, who hopes the proposed term bill increase will boost student group treasuries. "Unfortunately, all around us isn't good enough."

Changing the "sink-or-swim" atmosphere of the College--both in advising and in social life--took center stage for most of the candidates, who differed primarily in their suggested approaches to the problem.

"Harvard has it all, but it's not all there for students," said vice presidential candidate Benjamin M. Wikler '03, who said the council should focus on bringing both "big and small" amenities--like rock concerts and two-ply toilet paper--to students.

With their yellow bandana-clad supporters cheering them on, Fentrice D. Driskell '01 and John A. Burton'01 touted their core campaign theme--student surveys and feedback cards to give students a forum to express themselves.

"It's about making Harvard a better place," Driskell said. "To do that, you have to assess the student voice."

But some questioned how effective the council could be in only a year, given that it has little direct claim upon the administration with which to enforce its demands.

"In one year, you can't make a huge difference in an administration as large as this," said Frank X. Leonard '01 in response to a question about advising at Harvard. "I'm not going to promise that I can get you better advising by next December, but I'll give you a reasonable timeline."

The debate, which drew about 100 undergraduates, attracted no College administrators.

Presidential candidate Benjamin W. Dreyfus '01 took a more light-hearted approach to the debate and argued that the council should get more than the proposed $50 term-bill increase--$30,000 dollars more. He argued that students' entire tuition be sent directly to the council's coffers.

The other major issue of the night concerned the council's image. Council member Daniel E. Fernandez '03 asked the presidential candidates how they would combat the pervasive sentiment that the council was useless.

Candidates were quick to emphasize that they felt the council was an organization with tremendous potential, which required mostly tinkering and better public relations.

"It's really important for the president to be the single best PR branch of the council," said presidential candidate Todd E. Plants '01. "We need to develop more coverage, if not more favorable coverage."

Vice presidential candidate Nehal S. Patel '02 said she thought if the council's elections were more competitive, students would be more interested in it.

Leonard and his running mate, Catherine E. Tenney '01, both said their relatively recent arrival on the council--each was elected for the first time this semester--puts them in a position to reform the council to make it appear more legitimate in the eyes of the student body.

"I have the passion of an outsider but the knowledge of an insider," Leonard said.

Melvin V. Priester '01, who was at the debate, said he felt that--with the exception of the outlandish Benjamin W. Dreyfus '01--the debate was boring, and complained that candidates spent too much time talking about the council's image instead of substantive change.

"I think it's more than just a PR problem," he said.

Last night's debate was sponsored and run by the Institute of Politics.