GUEST COLUMN: Absolute Power Corrupts Absolutely

Rogers, Schorr and Foldesi have placed personal gain and a private agenda over the real facts surrounding the IAA. These UA members have committed numerous violations of the UA Constitution and Student Activities Council guidelines, and in doing so have abused their position of trust as elected representatives of the student body. In addition, they have instigated unwarranted attacks on the IAA and me personally; these attacks have appeared in The Daily Pennsylvanian, on UTV, in the UA newsgroup and most disturbingly, in the conversation I will detail in this column. From the beginning, Schorr has used the audit as a vehicle for personal gain as opposed to a search for truth. Instead of entering the situation from a truly impartial perspective, he has articulated a position of preconceived guilt without evidence. In fact he told the DP (10/5/95), "[I] think it is common knowledge that a lot of SAC groups do not spend money on what it is allocated for, and somebody has to see that that doesn't happen." He also said that the UA Budget Committee is going after the IAA because "it has one of the largest budgets." Although Schorr entered this investigation with questionable motives, I felt as a concerned and active student and as a member of the IAA, I should talk to him. While working in the Steinberg-Dietrich computer labs early Monday morning Oct. 9, I ran into Schorr. During our hour and a half discussion, Schorr stated that his intent was pure, and that he purported to merely want to find the truth. He added that we were not going to be the only group audited, rather we were just the first in a series of SAC groups to go through this process. He also stated that he went to the DP to get publicity for his investigation. Schorr added that he had heard some rumors regarding financial impropriety, which he was unable to substantiate when I pressed him for specific details. Although I asked him numerous tough questions (such as why he failed to go through the proper channels), I was reasonably secure that he had no ulterior motive. I thanked him for the time spent discussing the issues with me and then we both returned to our work. To even further demonstrate the cordial terms I had with Steve at the time, I even assisted him in a question he had on his paper and the technical difficulties he had at that time with the lab's printer. There is no way this seemingly amicable conversation could have prepared me for the shocking schemings I overheard between Schorr, Foldesi and Rogers a scant 12 hours later. Later that evening, I joined Jamie Hine for dinner at the Class of 1920 Commons. Moments after we sat down, we realized that UA members Rogers, Schorr and Foldesi, were sitting at the table behind us discussing the IAA audit in loud voices. Schorr led the attack by stating the true goal of the audit was "to screw over the IAA." Schorr then stated that their objective was to get the IAA "derecognized, defunded and suspended from SAC for at least one year." Schorr made reference to the conversation we had earlier that same morning. Rogers responded by warning Schorr to be wary of Steven Ebert and stated, "don't let the IAA slip through your hands." Foldesi joined in by making numerous childishly insulting remarks about my intelligence and abilities. Rogers concluded that "Steven Ebert might try to pull something. He might get his Jew Hillel friends and make it an anti-Semitic issue." At this point, I was fuming. If not for the intervention of Jamie Hine, I am not sure how I would have responded to such outright slander. I refrained from committing anything rash and walked away from the dinner table. I spent the remainder of dinner calming myself down and thinking about the dinner conversation. At the time, I could not understand why Rogers, Schorr and Foldesi would make such outrageous statements. I decided at that moment not to confront Rogers, Schorr and Foldesi until I had the opportunity to make this incident public knowledge. Minutes later, I even ran into the three UA members as they prepared to exit the Commons and decided not to bring up the issue. They continued their false front of friendliness despite their most recent conversation. As they exited, I realized that they had no clue that both Jamie and I overheard their entire conversation. From that moment forward, my faith in these UA members and in the integrity of the UA Budget Committee has been completely lost. Schorr and Foldesi make up two-thirds of the auditing body. Furthermore, UA Chairperson Lance Rogers is able to interpret the UA Constitution to suit their needs. At this time, we requested that SAC Finance -- the unquestioned body responsible for performing audits -- to audit the IAA. Rogers', Schorr's and Foldesi's comments clearly elucidate the unethical intent of two-thirds of the UA Budget Committee. Coupled with the UA chairperson's obliging attitude, these comments seriously question whether the IAA can get a fair and honest appraisal of the club's financial practices and organization. What is the real motivation behind the audit? The motivation cannot be oversight because the Office of Student Life must sign for every check issued to any SAC club anyway. Thus, the Schorr-Foldesi audit implies that OSL is incompetent or unethical in its handling of disbursements to SAC funded activities. Is it because there can be a legitimate suspicion of the competence of SAC Finance? The answer is clearly no. Although both Schorr and Foldesi are on SAC Finance, they mentioned neither an inkling of financial misconduct nor did they speak of any forthcoming UA Budget Committee audit during any SAC Finance proceedings. Is this audit a noble search for truth? Absolutely not. Any individual Penn student can go to the OSL and examine the financial records of any SAC funded group. A public audit, centered around unspecified and unsubstantiated rumors and conducted outside the boundaries of our student government's constitution clearly must have other motivations. Then why the audit? Last year, Dan Schorr, Mike Nadel and Lance Rogers were the primary force behind the referendum to change student government. Their proposed plan centered around a reconstituted UA that would oversee the funding of every student organization. It failed miserably. Having failed in their attempt to force SAC under their power, Steve Schorr, Lance Rogers and Tom Foldesi are trying a backdoor route. If these UA members exploit their positions of trust and power to bully the IAA, they could initiate a reign of terror that undermines the independence of SAC, and will allow them to control the amount of funding given to more than 150 campus groups. The unprecedented and unjustified UA audit of the International Affairs Association represents a clear and present danger to all SAC funded campus organizations. The flagrant disregard Schorr, Rogers and Foldesi have shown for ethics and the regulations of student government demonstrate the true nature of this tyrannical threesome. By standing up against the illegitimacy of this improper audit, and the conduct of these three UA members, the IAA is sending a message to the entire Penn campus. Not only is the IAA innocent of any financial impropriety, but it is at the forefront of the battle to defend the integrity of all student organizations from the abuse of power. Stand up for your rights, don't let this happen to you!

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.