Running on Experience

"I’m not the political genius I wish I were,” Matthew L. Sundquist ’09 says with a smile.

The charming and pointedly unpretentious Undergraduate Council vice president who casts himself as anything but a politician has emerged as the undisputed heir apparent to the UC leadership. Earlier this semester, council insiders saw UC Finance Committee Chair Randall S. Sarafa ’09 as a possible challenger to Sundquist. That’s no longer a concern; Sarafa is Sundquist’s running mate.

“If [Sundquist] hadn’t picked Randall, he might have run,” says Alexander “Zander” N. Li ’08, a former FiCom chair. Former UC Treasurer Benjamin W. Milder ’08 calls the selection of Sarafa “a safe choice—solid if unexciting.”

But politics is not what Sundquist wants to talk about. Wearing a red Mather sweatshirt, a backwards baseball cap, and jeans chopped off at the ankles, he leans back in his chair or slouches until a certain topic—perhaps the “sweet speakers” he promises to get for student use, or his job on Dorm Crew—draws his attention. Then he slams his hand down on the table and nearly shouts in laughter.

UC representatives past and present heap praise on Sundquist, tossing around words like “magnetic” and “uncanny.” UC President Ryan A. Petersen ’08 said he chose Sundquist as his running mate because he (Petersen) wasn’t “quite as outgoing.”

“If Sundquist had any mind towards politics he would be the most manipulative person I’ve ever met and the best at hiding it,” says Matthew R. Greenfield ’08, a former UC representative. “But he’s been far too kind to me and my friends for me to want to think that.”

WALKING THE PLANKS

In their campaign, Sundquist and Sarafa are largely touting reforms that have been talked about before—and ones they say they have the experience to implement. They emphasize change to the disciplinary workings of the Administrative Board, student group funding, mental health, and cable television in the dorms.

The two say they have already taken their platform for a test drive past the administration to see what is feasible. Their plans also includes a capital campaign to raise more money for grants and the purchase of sound speakers that can be rented out to reduce fixed costs for student events.

“For student groups, [funding] is sort of the nuts and bolts of what a lot of their interactions with the UC are,” Sundquist says. “To a lot of student groups, they won’t really ever be hugely interested in the advocacy efforts that we do, but this is something that touches them every day.”

In addition, Sundquist and Sarafa say they have a plan to improve the Student Events Fund, which offers certain students on financial aid free event tickets sold by the Harvard Box Office. They say they will reduce or eliminate per-ticket costs charged to student groups selling tickets through the box office so that more events will be ticketed through the box office and made available to students relying on the fund.

A ‘RARE’ TICKET

Sarafa also plays the role of a man of the people—the part that his running mate has refined so well. Unlike Sundquist, though, Sarafa prefers conservative dress and a reserved, good-natured chuckle.

A professed interest in helping students ties the two together.

“I know we get to be a part of facilitating other people’s college experience and making them be able to do their thing in college better and enjoy it more,” Sundquist says of his involvement in the UC. “That’s why I love it.”

He has also participated in a variety of student groups other than the UC. He is a Dorm Crew captain, and has written two articles for The Crimson this semester as a comper for the sports board.

Sundquist and Sarafa represent the only insider ticket in this year’s race. Both point to their experience on the UC as the main reason they should be its next leaders.

“In the past it’s been rare that a ticket would have someone who is very active in the Student Affairs Committee and someone with the Finance Committee,” Sarafa says.

“At the end of the day most things that people run for the UC on aren’t controversial,” Sundquist says. “It’s more the question of whether or not you can actually get those things done.”