Not Another 'Angry Letter'

To the Editors of the Crimson:

This is not an angry letter, but I am a member of the Harvard/Radcliffe Undergraduate Council. I feel compelled to respond to the editorial which appeared last Wednesday ("The UC's Private Party on Public Funds: Stupid and Sleazy" Feb. 12), not because of your allegations about the Mike Beys party, but because you seem to want to perpetuate this idea that the Council does not do anything for students. I cannot count the number of times my more cynical friends have asked me what the Council really accomplishes. As someone who has attended every meeting, I can tell you.

First, there is the faithful and consistent representation council members provide for their constituents by attending, and even voting in, the Committees on House Life, Undergraduate Education and College Life. These committees have a direct effect on policies that affect students and among the victories scored there, a Council Residential Committee sponsored reform in interhouse transfer rules.

Then there are the numerous accomplishments of the Council Service and Social Committees who have given you shuttle buses to and from the Yale game and Logan Airport before breaks, as well as the Yalegate party, the used book sale, the better shuttle bus service. There was a comedy night, the recent talent showcase and casino night, all of which had full attendance. We haven't even gotten to the freshman formal yet.

There's the intellectual life in the houses proposal which pushes for more house seminars and house sections from the Residential committee. There's CPR and Model Mugging classes coming from the Service and Security Committees. There's's the budget survey from University Governance which directly resulted from Dean Knowles' solicitation of student opinion on budget matters. And last but not least, there are the grants we give to so many undergraduate organizations, a process which requires countless hours of work by Finance Committee members.

While I have barely touched the surface, I must sound as though I am tooting the Council's horn a little loudly. As was mentioned in the editorial, there are cliques in the Council, but if we are a representative body of the University, which I believe we are, that is to be expected. I am a junior and this is my first year on the Council, but I have no problems getting my ideas heard or accomplishing anything I have wanted to do on the Residential Committee. In the Council, it is very easy to get a project started and, if it is a beneficial service for students, to get support for it.

This gets me to the Mike Beys/Spin Doctors controversy. I won't deny that it was a grave error. I was the member who asked if it would be open to people 18 and over and according to people who attended the event, people under 21 were admitted. Still, I have felt since soon after that vote that a mistake had been made because of the conflict of interest. That $20 for publicity was never collected, but even so, this much attention to a $20 mistake when compared to the thousands of dollars of services that the Council has provided for undergraduates so far this year, not even to mention the things to come, is somehow disconcerting. I understand that The Crimson editorial board is entitled to its opinions and I support the paper for printing them. However, it is equally important to report the full scope of beneficial things the Undergraduate Council does for its constituents. John Mann '93   Adams House UC Rep.