What's Your Opinion?

Political Parties in Student Assembly

Do you approve or disapprove of the idea of political parties in the Student Assembly?

Approve

In order to bring about constructive change at Harvard-Radcliffe, students must organize around an issue or set of issues. When the Assembly is not discussing issues, meetings become forums for displays of procedural knack. Political parties can raise issues and stimulate discussion. This discussion brings forth differences of opinion, leads to alternative proposals, and eventually resolves such differences so students can present a reasoned, united position to the University. These groups help foster student interest in what occurs politically at Harvard; they seek to combat the reigning apathy.

As a lobbying organization, the Student Assembly only has power when it has broad student support. Therefore, no individual or group of individuals can "seize power" in the Assembly. Thus, political parties in the Student Assembly cannot damage student interests; they can only serve to focus student opinion.

In any organization which addresses substantive issues, one finds politics. Persons familiar with the first Assembly can attest to this. What open political parties do is acknowledge this fact but attempt to bring politics above board. Politics in itself is not evil; politics that takes place behind closed doors most certainly is.

Ultimately voters have complete control over their elected representatives. Political parties provide an explicit and clear choice to the voter; by stating their views via a party platform, candidates show where they stand on a variety of issues. By raising issues and stimulating discussion, parties can foster open debate and allow voters to make educated choices.

Disapprove

Harvard is known for its diversity-- especially among its students and individual houses--a diversity the administration often doesn't recognize. The Student Assembly was created to ensure the right of all students to the widest possible participation in an unrestricted flow of information. By their very nature political parties in the Student Assembly would silence many divergent individual opinions. They key points to have in mind:

1. Bypassing the committee structure of the Assembly in any way disturbs the free flow of research and ideas that is crucial to the development of workable, well-drafted proposals. It is only through a lengthy exchange of divergent opinions in a committee format that all ramifications and issues raised by a proposal are confronted.

2. With one party versus another the focus could well become politics for politics sake and substantive achievement an occasional fluke. In a world of parties the incentive for rational discussion decreases and it often simply becomes an issue of counting votes or, at best, a behind-the-scenes horse trading compromise among the party leaderships;

3. Too many meetings not only reduces the number of students willing and able to fulfull the duties of an Assembly member but also membership in a party may reduce the incentive for Assembly members to keep track of individual needs and opinions in their own houses. Furthermore too many meetings means both that there is less time for the real work of research and that an even smaller number of party leaders are able to understand and control the situation:

4. The Assembly is not a government but a lobbying group in which the existence of inflexible factions will give the administration all the ammunition it will ever need to question the legitimacy and thoroughness of Assembly proposals. One can favor the existence of political parties in the various levels of government of the United States while still disapproving of political parties in the Student Assembly, a lobbying body whose constitution asserts that it "represents the general interests of Harvard-Radcliffe undergraduates" and claims none of the mandatory powers given to a government;

A vote for disapproval on this non-binding question will not force anyone or any group to stop meeting. It will, however, signify that you disapprove of the idea of political parties in the Student Assembly. A student Assembly that fails now not only stalls but hurts the future cause of student input at Harvard.

Extended Library Hours

Do you feel there is a need for increased hours in the undergraduate libraries?

Yes

The current hours (shown below) are inadequate.   Mon-Thurs  Fri  Sat  Sun Lamont  8:45 a.m. to midnight  8:45 a.m. to 10 p.m.  8:45 a.m. to 5:30 p.m.  noon to midnight Hilles  same  same  8:45 a.m. to midnight  same Cabot  9 a.m. to midnight  9 a.m. to 5 p.m.  9 a.m. to 10 p.m.  2 p.m. to midnight

No

The cost of keeping a library open longer might be added to students' term bills.

Alternate Meal Plans

Would you like food services to try a 21-meal-14-meal [no breakfast] plan on an experimental, evaluative basis for a peiod of one school year?

Yes

1. Savings: Students who choose 14 meal meals would save money--either $35 or $72 (these are only estimates), depending on which of the two types of 21-14 meal plans was implemeted.

2. Dining hall workers would not be affected during the experiment because all savings would come from the cost of food not purchased.

3. Collecting data: A one year experiment with a 21-14 meal option would allow the food services to evaluate the administrative and financial aspects of food plans in a working situation; this information could be used to provide better, more flexible services to students in the future.

4. House life: Breakfasts are the least attended meals in the houses; a no breakfast option would probably have little adverse effect on house life.

5. Students on the 14 meal plan could buy a small number of breakfasts each semester and still save some money.

No

1. Costs: Students who remained with 21 meals might have to pay more than they do under the present system. Under on of the two types of 21-14 meal plans, students choosing 21 meals would pay approximately $60 more in board charges. Under the other 21-14 meal system the board charge for 21 meals would remain the same.

2. Financial Aid: Some students might not receive the full saving from the 14 meal option because a reduction in board charges might be followed by a paralleled reduction in financial aid.

3. Security: There will necessarily be an increase in security measures with a possible increase in costs, in order to prevent students on the 14 meal plan from stealing breakfast.

4. House life: If variable meal plans encourage students to eat fewer meals in the houses, this may be detrimental to the communal spirit now found in the houses system. In addition, the increased security measures may affect the quality of the dining experience.

Which method of paying for a 21-14 meal [no breakfast] plan would you prefer?

Plan A: Students who choose 21 meals pay the same board charge as presently ($1278), and students who choose 14 meals pay $35 less.

Plan B: Students who choose 21 meals pay $60 more than presently, and students who choose 14 meals pay $73 less.

With plan A, students who choose 14 meals are subsidizing those who choose the 21 meal plan. With plan B, those who stay with the current 21 meal plan are penalized. Also, this sets the precedent of providing better services at Harvard-Radcliffe to those who can afford to pay more.

No

The cost of keeping a library open longer might be added to students' term bills.

Alternate Meal Plans

Would you like food services to try a 21-meal-14-meal [no breakfast] plan on an experimental, evaluative basis for a peiod of one school year?

Yes

1. Savings: Students who choose 14 meal meals would save money--either $35 or $72 (these are only estimates), depending on which of the two types of 21-14 meal plans was implemeted.

2. Dining hall workers would not be affected during the experiment because all savings would come from the cost of food not purchased.

3. Collecting data: A one year experiment with a 21-14 meal option would allow the food services to evaluate the administrative and financial aspects of food plans in a working situation; this information could be used to provide better, more flexible services to students in the future.

4. House life: Breakfasts are the least attended meals in the houses; a no breakfast option would probably have little adverse effect on house life.

5. Students on the 14 meal plan could buy a small number of breakfasts each semester and still save some money.

No

1. Costs: Students who remained with 21 meals might have to pay more than they do under the present system. Under on of the two types of 21-14 meal plans, students choosing 21 meals would pay approximately $60 more in board charges. Under the other 21-14 meal system the board charge for 21 meals would remain the same.

2. Financial Aid: Some students might not receive the full saving from the 14 meal option because a reduction in board charges might be followed by a paralleled reduction in financial aid.

3. Security: There will necessarily be an increase in security measures with a possible increase in costs, in order to prevent students on the 14 meal plan from stealing breakfast.

4. House life: If variable meal plans encourage students to eat fewer meals in the houses, this may be detrimental to the communal spirit now found in the houses system. In addition, the increased security measures may affect the quality of the dining experience.

Which method of paying for a 21-14 meal [no breakfast] plan would you prefer?

Plan A: Students who choose 21 meals pay the same board charge as presently ($1278), and students who choose 14 meals pay $35 less.

Plan B: Students who choose 21 meals pay $60 more than presently, and students who choose 14 meals pay $73 less.

With plan A, students who choose 14 meals are subsidizing those who choose the 21 meal plan. With plan B, those who stay with the current 21 meal plan are penalized. Also, this sets the precedent of providing better services at Harvard-Radcliffe to those who can afford to pay more.