RUS: Who Cares?

(This is the last of four articles on Harvard-Radcliffe student government organizations.)

"'DEBBIE Batts can't be beaten,' says the Marquis de Sade." Thus read a Cabot Hall campaign poster displayed by one of the two presidential candidates for the stillborn Radcliffe Union of Students (RUS). The poster was something of a shock, though not because of its contents.

In the past, elections to Radcliffe student government have taken place almost unnoticed. Indeed there almost seemed to be a quiet, happy understanding that the candidates would not force themselves on their constituency's attention.

Supporters of the Radcliffe Union of Students believe that it should and will change the climate of indifference. After all, they argue, RUS is the product of meetings of the Radcliffe Government Association that were long, heated, and tumultuous--adjectives rarely applied to Radcliffe student government. And the meetings were well-attended, probably better attended than any in the life of RGA (which RUS is designed to replace).

Yet, Cliffies' chronic lack of interest in student government is already hobbling RUS. Like all its predecessors, it is having trouble recruiting people to run as representatives. "Most of the students who come here were very active in high school," explains Judy Mumma '69, the former president of East House. "When they come here they just aren't interested in this stuff any more. Cliffies feel it's high-schoolish."

Another factor contributing to Cliffies' apathy is the widespread conviction that the administration will not listen to them no matter what they say. At one East House Committee meeting, as the conversation inevitably veered toward housing, Dean Soloman turned to the students and said: "If you don't like the idea of a residential college, you shouldn't be here in the first place. Just go somewhere else."

And yet, though only 47 per cent of the College turned out to vote in the final elections for the new student government, no one denies that RUS is different. When students did bother to think about RGA it was with very little respect. They looked on it as a glorified social committee, which met only to hear reports on such inherently dull topics as NSA conventions, or to coordinate freshman week, or to plan junior parents' weekend.

THE administration was more sanguine about RGA's usefulness-until this past semester. It had felt that RGA was an effective channel for transmitting messages to the students community, for sending up trial balloons on various proposals, and, generally for keeping in touch with student opinion. Then, with the hunger strike last spring over non-Radcliffe housing rules, with the dispute over the fourth House last semester, and finally, with the Dow incident, even those close to Mrs. Bunting had to admit that she and the administration were out of touch, despite RGA.

The guiding idea behind RGA's successor was a student government responsive to student needs. Whether or not RUS can achieve a degree of responsiveness will be the crucial test of its success or failure.

The mechanics will be worked out this weekend at a trustee-student-administration conference. The constitution will probably be so drafted as to seat students on a number of trustee committees if not the College Council itself. Mrs. Bunting has indicated that she favors undergraduate representation on, for instance, the Committee on Undergraduate Life, and the Library Committee.

With a more democratic judicial system, Radcliffe has already moved far ahead of Harvard. Students have an important voice both within the Houses and on the College-wide Judicial Board, which seats four students and five administration officials. But just as a majority of the students was unhappy with the Board's decisions on the Dow demonstration (seven girls were put on probation), there is no guarantee that the majority of the students will be satisfied with the decisions under the RUS constitution. First, one or two students on each committee are not going to be able to outvote the trustees. Second (and this is probably the most important point), there is no one student Opinion just as there is no one Radcliffe Girl. Many Cliffies feel that RUS is even less responsive to the needs of all the students than RGA, and even more the stomping ground of the few "student government types." An impressive group has argued that no government may, in fact, be the best solution. Under this non-system a crisis would call forth a group of people most interested in and informed on the issues at hand.

THE old question remains: How many girls at Radcliffe are going to be interested in student government? There is talk about student power, but according to John Loud, head of the senior residents (the 'Cliffe equivalent to resident tutors), "The students have not really thought it out." He suggested that students should be given the final say in certain areas, such as parietals. "Unless the girls are given some real power, only a tiny number will be interested in student government," Loud said.

RUS is a fresh idea. It is not surprising that a great deal should be expected of it. It is almost impossible to believe that at least some of these expectations will not be disappointed. And it is certain that it will fail to provide the definitive answers to the problems of student government at Radcliffe.