Individual Rights and the Undergraduate Council

To the Editors of The Crimson:

I must take issue with a passage in Mary S. Humes's article on the election results of the Undergraduate Council (10/11/83). In it, she states that: "Timothy J. Keating '83, a representative from Leverett House said he believes the Council's handling of finances can be improved by giving students a greater say in how the money is spent. "This observation gives the distinct impression that I am pro-Undergraduate Council and plan to work constructively toward that end. Nothing could be further from my true intentions or more against my moral code. If your reporters had taken the time to read my position paper. I clearly stated that my objective was to eventually abolish the Council.

What brothers me is that on two occasions I went to great length in explaining to your reporters why I want to abolish the Council. What surprises me is why my position was so blatantly misrepresented. I reject the possibility that it was an oversight. rather, I believe, it was a direct and intentional omission of a contrary view. As hard as it may be to believe, there are students in this bastion of liberalism who still value principles such as individual rights and free enterprise. As such a person. I am not asking you to embrace my convictions but only to let your readers know that there are people opposed to the Harvard-Radcliffe Undergraduate Council. Timothy J. Keating '85