Council VP Likely To Run for President

With the official declaration date for Undergraduate Council presidential candidates still nearly three weeks off, current UC Vice President Matthew L. Sundquist ’09 said last week that he would be conducting meetings with faculty members and top administrators to discuss whether the changes he might pursue as president would be feasible in the coming year.

Sundquist, the early favorite in the race, said there was “a good chance” that he was going to run. He later specified in an e-mailed statement that he will “need to know first that I’ll be able to accomplish change.”

Few others on the UC have been vocal about their ambitions for the upcoming election, and it appears unlikely that the council’s Student Affairs Committee (SAC)—the advocacy branch whose chair has gone on to win the top post in four of the past five elections—will yield a presidential candidate this year. Current SAC Chair Michael R. Ragalie ’09, who succeeded current UC President Ryan A. Petersen ’08 in that post, has insisted that he will not run.

Ragalie’s absence from the field has left Randall S. Sarafa ’09, the current chair of the UC’s Finance Committee, to take the mantle as Sundquist’s main potential opponent on the council. Sarafa has, in the past, worked with Sundquist on advocacy projects including universal keycard access to freshman dormitories.

Two current UC representatives, both of whom requested anonymity for fear of compromising their relationships with the potential candidates, confirmed last week that Sarafa and Sundquist had met to discuss the upcoming elections, and that there were no other UC insiders likely to run for the top office this year.

Sarafa himself said that he was thinking of running for office, although he had made no decision as of last Thursday. He would not say whether he has talked to Sundquist about being the latter’s vice presidential running mate in the race.

Presidential and vice presidential candidates must declare their intent to run by Nov. 21, and active campaigning will not be allowed to begin until exactly one week later, according to Michael L. Taylor ’08, chairman of the Election Commission.

PRESIDENTIAL PRECURSORS

If history is any indication, Sundquist would be favored to win this year’s elections should he choose to run. Since the UC began holding general elections for its top two positions in 1996, the two candidates who have run for the presidency after serving as vice president the previous year have both won by overwhelming margins.

Former presidents Sujean S. Lee ’03 and Lamelle D. Rawlins ’99—each of whom ascended to the UC’s top position from the vice presidential post—said they believed they were advantaged in their respective campaigns by their prior public exposure as the council’s second-in-command.

“We probably haven’t seen anyone with this much popularity in the sheer force of having more friends than anyone at the College,” said former UC representative Matthew R. Greenfield ’08 of Sundquist.

Greenfield, who served on the UC from his freshman through his junior years, and was once believed to be a favorite for the presidency himself, said he viewed the current vice president as being “the strongest candidate going into the race that I could imagine and certainly stronger than anyone I’ve seen at this time of year.”

According to an e-mailed statement from Rawlins, however, the advantage she gained from being vice president did not make the actual work of campaigning any less “brutal.”

Greenfield also added that he believed the same would be true for Sundquist, who—when things were looking so-so for the Petersen-Sundquist campaign last year—sent hundreds of personal e-mails to students, a task typically reserved for campaign staffers.

FATIGUE FACTOR

When former vice president Samuel C. Cohen ’00 decided to stay out of the race for UC president in 1998, it was precisely the brutality of the business that he cited in his decision.

“One year is enough,” he told The Crimson before the 1998 election. “It takes a toll on you. It’s a big time commitment and a big part of your life.”

Such considerations may yet prove significant for Sundquist, who has stated that his decision to run will be significantly influenced by whether he can once again make the daily sacrifices—both in terms of health and academics—that the meeting-laden, on-demand life of a top campus politico consistently demands.

Rawlins, who assumed the presidency as a sophomore, also weighed similar concerns in deciding not to run for the top spot again as a junior, even though it was made clear to her that she would be the favorite contender again that year.

“I was worn out,” she wrote. “I’d put academics on the back burner, and I wanted to reclaim what was left of my time at Harvard to focus on academics... it wasn’t hard to walk away from the UC, because I wanted my life back!”

COMING AT THE KING

As vice president, Sundquist has worked closely with administrators during his advocacy efforts. Lee recalled the exposure to College higher-ups during her vice presidential term as a helpful asset.

“It’s somewhat more convenient and easier for the person who has already established those contacts [with administrators],” Lee said of the policy-making efforts that can make or break a presidency.

Even with the perceived benefits of experience, few appeared ready to concede the presidency to Sundquist outright.

“Nobody’s ever got it in the bag,” said Greenfield. He pointed specifically to the “volatility” that has followed from the UC’s party fund feud with Pilbeam and from Petersen’s controversial, fiery speech at University President Drew G. Faust’s inauguration as a factor that could lead to voter uncertainty.

Andrea R. Flores ’10, a current UC representative who worked to rally freshman voters for the Petersen-Sundquist campaign last year, said any campaign aimed at unseating Sundquist would have to be “unconventional in nature,” catering heavily towards students unfamiliar with the UC and student groups that have not worked extensively with the UC in the past.

“Matt’s going to rely solely on his experience,” Flores said, “while a possible outsider candidate could say that they have a better perspective on the UC because they haven’t immersed themselves in it.”

Rawlins also had her own advice about what the campaign strategies of those opposing Sundquist should be.

“To attack an incumbent, it’s easy,” she wrote in her e-mail. “Attack the UC.”

—Staff writer Christian B. Flow can be reached at cflow@fas.harvard.edu.