Letters to the Editors

Saturday, February 7, 2004

From One Who Was There

Sirs,

Many who did not attend may ask why there was such strenuous opposition to the proposed new Alumni Association Constitution at the general meeting on December 6, 2003 just past. There were a number of reasons, but principal and most odious of which was Article 7, the provision covering future revision and amendment to the Constitution.

To better illustrate the issue, imagine if you will that 200-plus years ago our forefathers in their infinite wisdom chose to word the amendment provisions of our federal Constitution something like this:

The Congress of these United States shall require that all substantive and relevant amendments be submitted for ratification by 2/3 of the States, but shall otherwise reserve and preserve at their sole and exclusive discretion the determination of that which is substantive and/or relevant, as well as the adoption of any and/or all other amendments hereto.

Far fetched you say? Of course it is. Under such language, Congress could revise the Constitution almost at will without submission to the States for approval unless they chose to do so. If that had been the case, what is the likelihood our Constitution would have survived and stand as it does today as the bulwark of our free democratic society and the bedrock of American law and jurisprudence? If you take the time to read it, you will find the language above is in essence very, very much akin to that contained in the revised Article 7 as proposed.

Proponents of the revised Association constitution made eloquent appeals at the meeting for all alumnae to trust in the Association leadership's beneficence and good faith stewardship to act in the best interests of all alumnae, and to not burden them with guarantees of what they must do. We all agree we should be able to trust our leadership, and understand no one can totally guarantee the future.

However, that is just the point! Even expressions of intent, let alone promises (we all know how fragile political promises can be) are never sufficient guarantees for something as basic as a constitution. It therefore is neither unreasonable nor even improper to not just request, but to demand certain guarantees of what the new leadership will not do... e.g. give themselves the power to disenfranchise 62,000 plus alumni. Why will they not provide that simple assurance? Could it possibly be their intentions are otherwise? And can we take that risk?

At the December 6th meeting, the leadership trotted out an 11th hour resolution regarding Article 7 they no doubt hoped would reassure everyone of their intentions and save the day. The very fact they made the proposal made it very clear that the wording of Article 7 had been very much by design and was no mistake, and they were clearly aware of how offensive it was to so many. If the resolution had really contained guarantees against convening any special meetings, and against making any amendment without ratification by 2/3 of the alumni at large (which at first blush was how it appeared to be worded), even as a "last minute" effort it still might very well have turned the tide. But it did not contain any such protections any more than the original language did. On more careful scrutiny it was just more of the same vague and misleading language that in effect would leave them with virtually total power and control to amend the constitution any way they might see fit. Frankly, the fact the authors could have believed it would fool anyone let alone the educated audience to which it was directed was an intellectual insult. For many, it only helped to further re-enforce, reconfirm, and heighten our already vivid suspicion and distrust of the current Association leadership.

In this humble individual's opinion, what is needed is a broader, more virile and growing alumnae influence, not the reverse. The alumni at large should be able to participate in the election of all Trustees and alumni leadership positions, as well as express opinion and sentiment via survey or referendum on all important issues that affect the College. Only in this manner can the alumni body play the vital role in the open governance of the College that it should. And our Association should be leading the crusade, not the major agent to extinguish our influence forever!

The alumni voice has already been diminished to a volume far below that which it should be, and must be restored to its historical place as a key factor in the policy spectrum of the College. The current constitutional issue is but one small part of what I foresee as a long struggle ahead in this regard. If our alumni leadership structure and constitutional procedures are not reformed and revised to insure that end, then the alumni voice will be in serious danger of not just becoming lost in the wilderness, but totally extinct!

A. Epranian '52

Totally Humiliating Her

Sirs,

Thank you for printing in the latest edition the letter of Grace Chua '07. It is reassuring to hear a woman corroborate what I have long suspected: that women enjoy facials. Needless to say, my girlfriend and I will be celebrating tonight in smashingly plastering fashion.

Postscript: Joking aside, thanks for delivering your fine newspaper to my door, and keep up the good work.

Chris Langevin '05

Secrets, Whispers

Sirs,

Great to see you in Manchester. Please make one copy of video and show it to selected audiences: ski club, outdoor club, ROTC, etc. [see TDR 1/24/04]. I retain copyrights but authorize you to use one copy. Send original TODAY, because MY original was stolen along with ALL my road trip files from my Iowa caucus tour.

Semper Fidelis. Get me twenty-five men and women to get bin Laden. Only the few, the proud, the best should apply, send resumes, and, if they think they are the best, start biatholon training.

Curriculum: US Army survival manual, Special Forces manual, Sleeping With the Devil, Pakistan, etc. at Barnes and Noble.

I have maps of Pakistan and access to CIA declassified maps and land sat[ellite] photos. "Is Big 'D' is [sic] going after Bin with me? Big D is going to DC with me!" RSVP with RESULTS. Thanks. Regards to all at Big D.

Presidential Candidate Robert Haines

Robert Haines Needs YOU!

Sirs,

Please circulate copy of "A Declaration of Independence" and ask for signatures on this historic document [see page 9]. Thanks. Will be mailed separately.

Please recruit volunteers for our PA office in Poconos, three miles from end of I-84 and one mile west of Route 307/Route 690 intersection in big white house across from Barrell Restaurant on Rte 307 in village of Maple Lake. Bus service local and regional. Airport 14 miles away. Ski 2 miles away at Montage. Camelback Mountain and others 20 miles away. Resort Hotels: Pocono Manor 17 miles away. Train also for 11th Mountain Division here or at Dartmouth/Green/White Mountains.

THOUSANDS of state game lands ACRES for training, cross-country skiing, biathlon, hunting, fishing. Winter camp survival training CO-ED and R&R at resort hotels in Poconos and Pocono ski areas. (Hidu Kush mountains are 12000 feet).

Mail video in 9"x12" wrapped in toilet paper or hand towel paper. Library rate for $1.42.

Presidential Candidate Robert Haines

Letters to the Editors

Article Tools

Related Articles