February 2,1973 Elli $ml’1tt nub idlntli

%& ?8 (Editorial

The SGA Game

Student government is a training ground for young bureau,
crats. Or at least it would so appear, from what we have
seen of the operation of our own SGA through the first part
of this year. The organization seems to be occupied largely
with matters it has invented on its own. Individual members
and some SGA officials are often concerned more about man-
ipulating the power relationships between themselves than
with stopping to consider what services they can provide
the students. As a bureaucracy SGA is self-perpetuating, and
the longer it exists the larger it finds it necessary to grow.
So that while only four years ago the SGA Cabinet consisted
of only four people and the governing body was a Senate of
thirteen, we now have a Cabinet of eight and a Joint Board
of 23 plus numerous minor officials.

in the meantime, the bureaucracy seems almost unaware
that it has lost the confidence of the students of the college.
Few students, if asked, would say that SGA speaks for them
on the substantial issues.

We believe that the time, energy, and money presently
consumed by SGA is largely a waste of resources. The or-
ganization needs streamlining and a thorough reorganization
to gear it towards better serving the function for which it
exists. And what is that function? Probably the best rationale
for the existence of student government was provided last
semester by SGA Vice-President John Pfeffer.

Student government, he said in an 5&3 article, is a “sounding
board” to help (1) assess student sentiment, (2) act on campus
issues when the need arises, and (3) provide an opportunity
for students to make their voice felt in administrative cir-
cles. “Thus," he continued, “SGA provides an active student
forum for the presentation and elucidation of issues relevant
to the College, of both social and academic nature, that cannot
be found elsewhere on this campus.”

In essence, the organization provides a structure to be used
when the need arises. There are times when we desperately
need a structure through which to express ourselves-~classic
examples are the Kent State/Cambodia crisis of Spring 1970

,‘ and the antiwar activities of last Spring. Furthermore, it

‘ serves some da by-day purpose by designating student
leaders for administrative convenience and providing on a
regular basis certain small services to the students-having
a Student Coordinator to complain to, for example.

Let us assume that these activities, as such, are valuable
and desired by the students. The current SGA, however, has
gone' far beyond that simple structure. Dealing with issues
and self—created problems of virtually no concern to the aver»
age student, it wastes valuable time and money. Furthermore,
it has grown so large and cumbersome that much time and
energy is spent with the internal matters of the bureaucracy
itself rather than in providing any worthwhile service to stu7
dents. At times the whole organization borders on absurdity.

Consider, for example, spectacle we beheld last week at
the Joint Board meeting: half the residents of Main Hall were
there, protesting the establishment of a College pub in their
basement (the idea of the pub had originated in SGA), defending
their student interest against encroachment by the student
government; the recently-appointed SGA Treasurer, who was
supposed to serve without reimbursement, was giving himself
a salary from student moneys while cutting back on funds to
other student organizations, notably KDIC; and a resolution
was passed substantially reducing the independence and power
of the Student Auditor, whose office is by nature supposed to
be independent of other student organizations.

In a word, student government has become just another ad?
ministrative bureaucracy, self~perpetuating and internally
oriented, chugging along its own path and wandering farther
and farther from the issues which are of interest to the stue
dent body at large.

Grinnell students need tolerate the situation no longer. We
need not the present SGA, but rather an organization which
will seek out the real desires and needs of students and let
itself be used by them when the need arises, SGA should have
no life beyond what the students give it. We need no one to
hold our hand.

BUSlNESS muncen.
CIRCULATION MANAGER
sronTs ubirou , . unyrcmviri
coLuMNisTs nm Alt. Fran
Cullur, Gregg mum-r. .lzrk anpril, mu
Mason, ionu Polls.

PuoToonthERs Johnﬂrnerxl,
nun Erammer, Ken 1 Brush Julio Dunn,
Elli cimr, Craig Kuglsnki iiy Mucrlro,
Bah Sparks, Ken Wmoknr

.Toln Glenn mg
PatShlsmilo

all): brlmlell
§tarltt and 331ml;

'ltfz crumii Surlni inn Blink .5 in. :lndeni Mits-
prprr of crinuru College publisnrd mm Ihilo
in. tuner. is ln Session by In! Grinnell Cullen-
Committee or. slum: Publications in mm an.
irmi opinions do not netunrlly rinrri u. mix:
of u. studenl may, hmlly or "minimum of
Grinnell College Malerlai from ur 5min and
Blau mun be reproduced for publication union
in exprni consent oi DI: editor,

ARTIST . Miriam uvrsiom
TVPIST.. Nancy divrld
FEPORTERS. , err Bret-d.
Nick mun-in. [lzlne ciruy. AnnCnsst-i.
Mirnrlle Casey Davul Ciow. mu diam,
Curl chrrrii, Mxrly lift-I, Illillm Kathi,
Mixinr uovy. Ran Melivln, Craig Murphy,
biyo inroni, Slave Nnnn. BonnIcRosle,
nrenl Schnndrlmeyer, PnnlSIrmers, Mill”
in. urckrr, Ken Winoknr, Trrry Won

Suand rim pnsuxe paid crmnrii, low: iniiz

EDITOR. ..
MANAGING EDiTon
cow rbi-mn .

, .bon minim
. MerryWIesrlcr
ronn Wylie

Wilcher. Students’ Dilemma

To the Editors,

1 am greatly disturbed by Dean
Walker’s action restrictingthenum-
ber of independent projects, Hisar-
bitrary action, promulgated without
consultation with student leaders or
the A11»College Educational Policy
Committee, restricts an individual
faculty member to 18 credits of
397-98, 0r18 creditsoquided Read-
ing Proiects or a combined semester
total of 28 credits of independent
projects and Guided Reading Pro»
Jects, Two detrimental effects may
result from this restriction.

The immediate effect of Walker’s
dictum is to disrupt the schedules
of students already enrolled or plane
ning to enroll in independents. Many
Students did not enroll in Scheduled
Courses on the assumption that their
independents would be approved by
the Dean's office. While it is not
too late to add a course hi this point,
the rejection of an independent on
the grounds of faculty course over
loads places the students in an uni
tenable position. The independent
may be important to his/her major,
or the studellt may not be able to
enroll in any course in whichhe/she
has an interest or ability. if the
student does manage to enroll in a
course, he/she may be irreversably
behind. It is grossly unfair to place
any student in this position three
weeks into the term, If the Dean’s
office had been concerned with the
effect of this ruling upon students,
they could have issued the memor-
andum before registration, or made
it applicable only to succeeding sent»
esters.

The Second effect of Walker’s rule
ing is a longrterm one, and in that
respect more important. We are en-
rolled in a small liberal arts col-
lege that because of financial and
staffing reasons cannot afford to
provide several courses, and com-
pletely ignores certain fields, such
as geology Courses are designed
to appeal to a broad spectrum of
students, not just majorsi Thereare
not enough Students or faculty to
provide the impetus'for the iii-depth
courses one would find at a large
university. The end result is that
most courses here are surveyr
oriented and descriptive ratherthan
analytical or experimental. If astur
dent desires to explore some field
in depth, he/she must take an inde
pendent. Yet Walker’s restrictions
severely curtail the possibilities
of inrdepth studies. In a large
department such as Biology, wilh
135 majors, it is conceivable thata

Aronin: Sex

To the Editors:

After residing on these premises
for many months now, it has come
to my unavoidable attention that
there is an apalling lack of lust
on campus. Sure, there are a few
farty parties Where maybe some-
body gets a piece, and there are a
few relationships going on, but the
fact remains that the average min
on the sheets still isn’t getting any
ough cheese.

When a young man has to break
his back for his courses and then
in addition has to break his back
to find the tiniest smidgen of will—
ing butt, the pressures and frustrar
tions become too great for even the
most steadfast and stoical gentler
lnan.

College social life should be more
than a toke and a buzz on Saturday
night. Where are the wanton sexual
urges of our ancestors who founded
this great land and propagated the
species so that there would be any
ough of us to move westward? Ree
member, sex is beautiful, and even
if it wasn’t, it’d still be a lot more
fun than pounding the pulp in Bur-
ling. Let us all castaway our Vic-
torian shackles of decency, and de
bauch till kingdom come

Though rm sure I must take rev
dress to the cries and scowls of
those who brand these statements
chauvenistic, immature, perverted,
etc , i feel that my opinion iS not
uncommon among my peers and
should therefore be expressed. i
can only view the situation from my
own position, which is certainly not
the one that i would like.

Ira Aronin

student could never obtain an inde-
pendent because fhe' department’s
five faculty members were over—
loaded every term. The freedom to
pursue one’s interests in depth and
the possibility to do independent
research at an undergraduate level
is one of Grinnell’s strongest at-
tributes, i am dismayed that Dean
Walker has seen ill to curtail this
freedom

At the same time I think Walker's
action was directed at a real prob-
lem. The number of independents
has risen precipitously in the last
few years, Many members of the
faculty find it difficult to reject
appeals for independent work, and
consequently feel overworked. As if
to add insult to injury faculty mem-
her: are not financially compensated
for the amount of time they spend
on independents, While it is theorr
etically possible to begin paying face
ulty members on the basis of the
number of independents they direct,
in the current financial condition of
the college, this is unlikely. There
is, though, a feasible alternative to
Walker's action. If Grinnell instir
tuted a work/study program or ac-
tively encouraged off-campus pro-
grams such as Argonne or the Ja-
pan program, this would provide
another outlet for independent work
and reduce the amount of pressure
upon lhe faculty here. A tentative
move was made in this direction
last semester by Mr. Wall. Ihope
that the questionnaire he Sent out
on the subject of a work/study pro»
grain is now followed up by Dean
Walker. A failure to do so would
mean the curtailment ofindependent
work here, which as lnoted can have
detrimental effects.

Mark H. Willcher

Miller: Yes To
Snow Sculpture

To the Editors:

This is to protest the wanton deSr
truction of a libidinous snow sculpr
ture which appeared and Was des-
troyed on the night of January 22
outside of the Bookstore-Carnegie-
A,R,H. square, This snow sculpture
was a true work of art and an 8X7
pansive imagination running wild.
This seven fool giant could have
become a lower of strength and
inspiration to Grinnell students.
Those Who wreaked havoc on such
a fitting monument to the greatAm—
erican ideal should neither he hated
nor laughed at. Rather, they should
be pilled for lheir poor taste and
impotence.
in conclusion, lwould like to exp»
ress my deepest regrets to the crea-
tor or creators concerning the dis-
memberment of the monolithicinstv
rument. i also express the hope that
this desirable obelisk be rebuilt,
if possible, larger and better able
to resist the winds of puritanism.
A student concerned with the quale
ity of the Grinnell experience.

Tom Miller

Crow. Recruiters Oller Option

To the Editors:

1 must respectfully disagree with
the Peace Collective on their p05»
ition against allowing a Marine
Corps recruiter on campus. ,Par—
licnliirly, i wish to make two poin-
ts. First, I do not feel that the
United States is in the clutches
members of the RC, do, They
perhaps forget that this nationis ex-
iting, not entering, a war. That
war, it might be well to recall,
was conceived, escalated, and mane
aged in unprecedentedly minute as,
tail by high-ranking civilians. in?
cluding Robert McNamara, who
more than any other Secretary of
Defense dominated and cowed the
military. 1 think that the experi-
ences of the past decade have left
a profound disillusionment among
the American people with military
solutions.

Reflecting this disillusionment are
budget figures. In 1970 the Defense
Department budget declined 31 pi
lion, while otherfederalgovernment
expenditures rose by $13 billion.
In 1971 the Defense budget Was Cut
further by $2.5 billion, and other
government programs were in?
creased $17.4 billion. In 1972, $600
million more was spent on defense,

Breed: One-Exit

To the Editors:

Dean Walker's action on indepen-
dents last week calls for several
comments. While 1 do not dispute
the need for some guideline to pre
vent a few over ambitions faculty
members to take on too many in
dependents, the manner in which
the Dean made this decision Was
insensitive to the nature of thei .
stitution which he supposedly dir-
ects, First, it is questionable to
straitrjacket a Whole faculty be
cause of a few isolated offenders.
Second and far more important,
the Dean superseded the entire com-
mittee structure in dealing out his
unilateral decision. The all-came
pus arc is there for n purpose.
has student, incully and adminis-
tration representatives to insure
fairness, and is the natural path-
way for such an action Approval
should be in the hands of the fac-
ulty Executive Council When these
bodies are ignored it cannot help

as $19.9 billion was added to other
expenditures. The 1973 budget es-
timates Defense expenditures un-
changed, and other expenditures-at
an additional $113.1 billion. And the
costs of foregoing a draft in terms
of higher expenditures for pay, al—
lowances, and pensions have risen
sharply despite a marked decline
in men in uniform, to such an ex
tent that they now consume some
60% 0f the current $78.3 billion de-
fense expenditure.

Secondly, 1 am disturbed by the
repressive nature of the P.Ci’s
determination to censor what views
may be presented on the Grinnell
campus. This is a serious mat-
tor, for it goes, I feel, to the heart
of one’s conception of Grinnell.
ls if to be a place where people
are exposed to differing ideas which
are debated and discussed? or is
it to be a place where people are
indoctrinated in accordance with
the received wisdom? I should think
there would be very few persons
who would actually join the armed
forces. But what point is there in
foreclosing, or more importantly,
What right does anyone else have
to foreclose their options.

David Crow

llollen Second

but cause tension in the structure
and undermine its smooth runnings.
Third, and most important, is the
fact that in taking this action he
has ignored the personal commitv
ments of students and faculty mem—
bers, many of which dated back to
last December The Dean shows a
dangerous insensitivity to the fact
that this is an institution of human
beings, each with special needs
which the administration should be
trying ils damndest to accomodate;
this is what distinguishes a college
from an ordinary business firm,
where decisions can be made sole-
ly in the name of efficiency,

1 hope that :1 change in tone will
soon overtake the administration,
or 1 fear that the next decision
of this nature that he makes will
be enough to create an ugly situa-
tion in which the students and fac-
ulty line up together against the
Dean's office (and remember,
there's only one exit to fhe second
floor of Nollen House).

Mike Breed

 

