STUDENTCAUCUS-L Archives

March 2003, Week 3

STUDENTCAUCUS-L@HUNTER.LISTSERV.CUNY.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Arielle Kuperberg <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Arielle Kuperberg <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 19 Mar 2003 12:38:35 -0500
Content-Type:
multipart/alternative
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (5 kB) , text/html (6 kB)
Dear Jillian (and others)  

I too was a senator when that resolution was passed.  And what was the result?  The Board of Trustees remains the same, we are still answerable to them, and President Raab is still the president.  Although I agree that we as a senate should officially state our opposition to the budget decrease, and tuition increases, it is important to note that in the practical sense of the word, this resolution has little hope of actually changing anything.  

If we're havinga public debate, why in brookdale or the philo club?  Why not in the west lobby?  I sat on a panel that was held  there a few years ago (On "patriotism and the new enemy"), and most of our attendents were people passing by who heard the panel and were interested in having their voice heard.  Compare this with the number of people who pass by the philo club  or the number of people who are pass the assembely hall at brookdale (where I assume this is going to be held, although Alisha didn't put that in her email).  I live there, and most people don't leave the upper floors of the dorms , and are only aware of meeting when they slip something under our doors (which i don't believe they have done for this meeting, at least not yet).  And only 700 out of 16000 student are there.  The west lobby is much more public and will ensure a maximization of student input.

~Arielle

-----Original Message----- 

From: Jillian Murray 

Sent: Tue 3/18/2003 9:58 PM 

To: [log in to unmask] 

Cc: 

Subject: Re: Resolution on Tuition Increases (re: utility)









	Dear cynical gadfly, [take no umbrage: history's most treasured gadfly is Socrates, and I'm his biggest fan]

	

	I think the resolution opposing tuition increases is important for two reasons:

	-- It's not obvious or even necessary that CUNY and SUNY students oppose the tuition hike. Indeed my brother, an engineering student at SUNY Stony Brook, supports it as a means of recovering revenue and improving facilities.

	-- The HC Senate, as a shared governance system, represents the convictions of students, faculty, and administration in the college. Insofar as the Senate is genuinely a representative democratic body (one could certainly argue that it isn't), the Senate can speak for the college community. So a statement from the Senate is a lot more powerful than, say, one from the Philosophy Club, to whom no one does (nor should) listen. 

	

	For a bit of history (I'm really avoiding my homework now), check out one of the most chilling moments experienced in my term as a senator: a statement of "no confidence" in the Board of Trustees at the time of Pres. Raab's appointment as Hunter president. 

	http://hunter.listserv.cuny.edu/scriptshc/wa-hc.exe?A2=ind0102C&L=HUNTER-L&P=R457&I=-3

	

	Best,

	Jillian

	

	

	At 09:44 PM 3/18/2003 -0500, you wrote:

	



		And I really hate to always have to be the cynical gadfly but is this

		resolution really necessary? This is like tenants issuing a formal complaint

		that they oppose rent increases. Well duh, of course they oppose rent

		increases, they're tenants! But then again, in the frivolous political

		world, formal statements must be issued for everything lest some lame brain

		or opportunist claims you don't care.

		

		And what, exactly is "adequate funding"? Gov. Pataki seems to think his

		budget cuts provide for "adequate" allocations. And what else is that poor

		President Raab to do?

		----- Original Message -----

		From: "Jillian Murray" <[log in to unmask]>

		To: <[log in to unmask]>

		Sent: Tuesday, March 18, 2003 8:58 PM

		Subject: Re: Resolution on Tuition Increases

		

		

		> The Senate Administrative Committee will be meeting tomorrow morning,

		where

		> I will be making the final arguments for putting forth this resolution at

		> tomorrow evening's Senate Meeting. Further edits and amendments are

		welcome

		> until tomorrow morning. This is how it now reads:

		>

		> BE IT RESOLVED, That the Hunter College Senate opposes the governor's 2003

		> budget proposal to raise tuition at CUNY by $1,200,

		>

		> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate opposes the governor's cuts to

		> financial aid programs such as SEEK and TAP

		>

		> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate demands that the State of New York

		> restore adequate funding for CUNY,

		>

		> BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, That the Senate supports and encourages the

		efforts

		> members of the Hunter community to prevent the budget cuts, and urges

		> President Raab to take a stronger stance on the tuition hikes.

		>

		>

		> - - - - - - - - - -

		> "Can it be that my fate as a novelist consists

		> in compromising all my heroes and heroines

		> in the eyes of well-bred people?"

		> -- Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky, "What Is to Be Done?"

		> - - - - - - - - - -

		> Jillian Murray

		> http://studentweb.hunter.cuny.edu/~murrayj

		> - - - - - - - - - -

		> 



	- - - - - - - - - -

	"Can it be that my fate as a novelist consists 

	in compromising all my heroes and heroines 

	in the eyes of well-bred people?"

	-- Nikolai Gavrilovich Chernyshevsky, "What Is to Be Done?"

	- - - - - - - - - -

	Jillian Murray

	http://studentweb.hunter.cuny.edu/~murrayj

	- - - - - - - - - -




ATOM RSS1 RSS2