If you're a student at Amherst, you probably already know that the AAS has begun cracking down on funding for student groups, due to excesses in previous years. If you're one of the lucky ones who has not dealt with this personally, here are some fun facts from an old AAS email to get you thinking. Last fall, 64 clubs submitted budget proposals for the spring. An average of 38 percent of the requested money was actually supplied.
There was an approximate $28,000 surplus from fall semester, according to an article in The Student last week ("AAS Discusses Alcohol Policies With Lieber"). So you'd think the AAS would now attempt to responsibly allot that "rollover fund" money to the clubs who have had to cut programs and go without vital supplies in order to save the AAS money.
How silly of you! Instead The AAS has set aside all $28,000 for one campus wide, big-ticket event. But instead of inviting wide discussion on what this event should be, they decided to give all of the money to the spring dance committee, so that this year's fancy dance could be even more opulent and wasteful than last year's (which only cost $17,000). That's right, thousands and thousands of dollars are being thrown in the mud to purchase flooring so that "certain forms of pointy footwear," according to the same article, don't stick in the ground.
"Sweet Jesus," you might be asking now, "what could possibly justify lavishing such an enormous sum on what is essentially a big dress-up party?" Can one short evening of even the most manic enjoyment possibly enrich the lives of students enough to spend thousands of dollars on decorations and party treats? Does a posh dance even come remotely close to achieving what other student groups accomplish? Does it teach students important life lessons or skills? How about fostering a sense of pride and personal self-worth? Unless you consider conspicuous consumption to be an important life skill, I would argue that the spring formal does not do any of these things.
What about campus unity? That's what this money is supposed to be set aside for, right? It seems to me that the prom is better at provoking resentment and animosity than making us feel like a community. And if you don't think that last year's formal was controversial, consider the fact that one of the sophomore class senators based his winning platform last spring entirely upon attacking the expense of the dance.
Since when did we need an opulent tent to have a good time together as a campus? Casino was fabulous and it was held in Valentine. The carnival for spring weekend last year was a blast, and they didn't even need to purchase commemorative glassware to make sure people had fun. A good party depends more on whom you're with and what you do than on the quality of the flooring and decorations.
Over the past week, angry students have been sending emails to their AAS representatives hoping that the AAS would respond to their concerns by re-opening the question in the senate. Several senators agreed to bring the issue up at the last Senate meeting, held on March 4. In spite of these promises, the question of support for the dance was not even discussed. Is it any wonder that people don't take the senate seriously when they won't even consider the issues we obviously care about?
If we absolutely must dump loads of money on one costly event in order to feel like a community, at the very least there should be some campus-wide discussion about it first. Maybe even a vote, huh? Wouldn't that be nice? If costly events like the spring formal are justified in their all-inclusivness, we should all be included in the process that creates them.
Sarah Sorscher '05
Pre-emptive war unacceptable
As a one-time 'special student' (a Fulbright scholar), I entreat you to do everything imaginable to prevent your government from waging war against the people of Iraq. I am deliberately formulating "the people," as I am fully aware that the regime of Iraq is utterly detestable and must be contained by the Western community and by forces beyond that realm. But the scenario that has been developed by the U.S. government and its poodle- i.e. the British-is that of an unacceptable pre-emptive war, which would not only set dismal standards for other powers but also would quite undoubtedly unleash a wave of terrorism (especially hitting the U.S.) that might even eclipse Sept. 11.
I was a member of your academic community only for the brief period of 1964-65. I have very rarely communicated with the College or its affiliates ever since. But my heart has always been with Amherst College. Today I feel it is the spirit that Amherst imbued into me that motivates me to write these lines to Amherst College. "Terras Irradient": "Let them give light to the world"-what a wonderful motto! Do it! Let's do it!
Let me put in a personal note. As a German national, I feel proud that after two world wars unfortunately initiated by the leaders of my fatherland, the government of my country-which, no doubt, owes so much to the generosity of the American people-is proving that it has learnt its hard lessons from history by saying "NO" to an unjustified attack on a country that is a dubious case, but well under control without the nightmares of a modern war.
Those people in America who are irritated by our stance should be proud of this evidence of their successful re-education. Sometimes the pupil is right-and the teacher is a really great one if he has the stature to admit it.
I know so many people who are really mad at the American Iraq policy-and at the same time they are definitely pro-American. To them, and to me, to be anti-Bush is to be pro-American. Or, in the words of my venerable mentor, Senator William Fulbright, it is the "arrogance of power" that has got the better of the American government for the time being.
Go Amherst!
Rolf D. Habich '65