LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: UMC questions purpose of Scholars Weekend

To the Editor: Minority Scholars Weekend is an event sponsored by the Admissions Office inviting prospective students of color to Penn. The Admissions Office outlines the weekend's events and then asks groups to sponsor certain events, such as the party that took place on the Saturday of the weekend.? Several things changed this year from previous years: the weekend took place in February, rather than March. Ethnically specific parties that had been held in previous years were also eliminated. One of the chief complaints of past scholars had been that the parties were segregated by race and that they would have liked to have seen more integration. Therefore, the Social Planning and Events Committee and the UMC were asked by the Admissions Office to co-sponsor the party that took place on Saturday this year. The UMC did request of its constituent groups that other parties not be held on that day to prevent the separation that had occurred. It was totally and completely misleading for Yee to imply that the UMC would "show that it is acceptable not to associate with people based on their color." It is stated in Yee's letter that a prospective student was "expected to attend the 'Asian' party which was thrown somewhere else." This was definitely not the expectation of UMC members. African American, Asian, Latino and Native American scholars alike were all invited to this year's party. It is unfortunate that these misunderstandings took place, but there are several underlying, more urgent issues evident here also. What is the purpose of Minority Scholars Weekend and what are the intentions of the Admissions Office? Who exactly does the Admissions Office consider a minority? Why are African American and Latino American students always grouped together, seemingly versus Asian Americans? Apparently, many of the Asian groups felt excluded from Minority Scholars Weekend this year, as if they were not considered minorities. These are deep-seated issues that need to be dealt with and the UMC is currently working with other groups that represent students of color to work out a better understanding of these issues. It is important that we work together, rather than pointing fingers at any one group, especially within the community of color here at Penn. Onyx Finney UMC Chairperson College '96 Susie Lee UMC Vice-Chairperson College '97 (4 signatures follow) Funds misappropriated To the Editor: Manipulation, immaturity and ego have been a staple of Penn student government for far too long. Led by David Shapiro, the soon-to-be-defunct Student Activities Council Finance Committee recently recommended over $100,000 of student monies to be appropriated to SAC groups, despite the fact that SAC contingency funds only amount to $38,000 ("SAC body elects new leadership," DP, 3/1/96). This extremely irresponsible gesture is being made only to make life more difficult for the SAC Steering Committee in its final meeting and to impede the transition period as a new Executive Committee is formed. Shapiro has been calling up SAC groups and offering to give them whatever sum of money they want (even if they had no intention of asking for more money). Immediately after giving these groups inflated recommendations for funding, SAC Finance Committee member Paul Welfer has been "reminding" their SAC reps that he is running for the new Executive Committee and would appreciate their vote. When you combine this disgusting behavior with the mean-spirited and misinformed attack article on then-SAC Steering Chairperson Graham Robinson that Shapiro initiated in the DP last month, you get a picture of exactly how far removed from reason and morality certain members of student government are these days. Lester Grant College '96