Search Results
Below are your search results. You can also try a Basic Search.
(04/03/91 10:00am)
Engineering and Wharton junior Dave Wessels was named next year's chairperson of the Student Activities Council by SAC leadership last night. The appointment was announced last night after an hour-long deliberation by the members of the steering committee who were elected last week. College junior Felicia Maddox will serve as vice-chairperson, Wharton junior Kevin Wong as finance liaison, College sophomore Brandon Fitzgerald as UA liaison and College junior Hae Kyung Park as Houston Hall Board liaison. Wessels said last night he looks for the new leadership to govern the body similar to this year's administration, but added that he hopes SAC will address several issues which may improve the way the body functions. "I do think there is room for improvement," Wessels said. "The SAC body is so large right now that discussion rarely happens." But Wessels added that he wants any changes which would affect SAC to be made by SAC and said he is not in favor of a continuation of the constitutional convention to determine the future of student government. "Rather than have the constitutional convention decide what SAC is going to be, SAC will decide what we are going to be," he said. But he added that if the conventions resume next year, a representative from SAC steering committee will "definitely take a role." Greg Shufro, the outgoing SAC vice-chairperson, said he is "very optimistic" about the new board. Unlike previous boards, each of the members of this year's administration has previous SAC leadership experience. Wessels was a member of this year's steering committee, while Fitzgerald, Maddox, Park and Wong have all served on SAC's finance committee. Members said this previous experience will enable them to serve SAC better. "Experience will benefit us all," Wessels said. "Having four former finance people on the committee will be exceptional." Shufro agreed, saying "there is a need for continuity, and [their experience] will make the group run better." SAC steering makes recommendations to the SAC body when student groups wish to be recognized or re-recognized by SAC. Only SAC recognized groups are eligible for SAC funding. Last month's full SAC meeting was the last one at which student groups could apply for recognition, with the new steering committee taking over this responsibility next fall. The committee also makes emergency funding decisions when the entire SAC body cannot be called. The new SAC committee took over this duty immediately after being selected last Tuesday. Wessels said last night that no group came to the steering committee this week for emergency funding, nor does he expect any to do so before the next meeting. The committee's first official duty will be running this month's SAC meeting, but, unlike past years, they will co-administer the meeting with the outgoing steering committee, to ensure that the meeting runs smoothly.
(04/03/91 10:00am)
Spring Fling officials announced last night that acoustic guitarist Gerard McHugh will open this year's annual concert for headliners Indigo Girls. Organizers also said last night that ticket sales for the April 19 event are proceeding as planned, with over 2000 tickets already having been sold. "While we're pleased with that [amount], we anticipate more sales as we get closer to Fling," Fling Co-director Denise Rubin said. Co-director Todd Fruchterman said that during a two-day pre-sale held two weeks ago, approximately 1300 tickets to hear the Grammy-award winners were sold. He also said ticket sales have already nearly doubled those sold for last year's Spring Fling featuring Meat Loaf, for which about 1100 tickets were sold. Tickets last year cost over $10 each, while this year's sell for $6. Rubin also said organizers did not have a say in the opening act decision, but that the Indigo Girls were authorized in the contract signed with Fling to bring anyone they wanted. Officials said the third act, an as-yet-unannounced local band, has not yet been contracted. Officials said they have a "short-list" of possible performers. SPEC Concerts Co-director Ed Gold said this band will be chosen and announced by Friday. He said that it will "definitely not" be an acoustic-folk band similar to McHugh or the Indigo Girls. "We're looking for a different style of music than the folk guititar sound," Gold said. "We just want everyone on campus to be interested." Rubin said the band will be chosen to "complement" the sound of the headlining act. She added that this band will be "familiar" to University students and will be selected "to attract a more diverse crowd but will interest people that would not be interested in the Indigo Girls, per se." "We're going to go after [other types of music], in the spirit of this Fling and to help diversify the concert," Fruchterman said. "Hopefully that will appeal to people who aren't too gung-ho on the Indigo Girls-type music." Tickets can still be bought at the Annenberg Center ticket office for $6 each. Students must present a valid PENNcard to purchase the tickets and a maximum of four tickets will be sold per person.
(04/02/91 10:00am)
The members of the next year's Undergraduate Assembly were announced last night, and immediately after the results, four members threw their hats into the ring to run for chair of the body. Virtually every incumbent who ran in the three-day election last week won a seat on the body, in an election which drew only 19 percent of eligible students, according to Nominations and Elections Committee chairperson Marcus Causey. The membership of the entire steering committee, including chairperson, vice-chairperson treasurer, secretary and two nominees for University Council steering representative, will be decided at the UA's "transitional meeting" tomorrow. The four members who announced their candidacy for the chair were Allison Bieber, You-Lee Kim, Andrew Tsai and Mitch Winston. All four are sophomores running for a position which is typically awarded to a junior. Elections for the steering committee, which is decided by the membership of the UA in debate-style proceedings, typically run upwards of four to five hours, and several student leaders said they expect a competitive race this year. After the announcement of the winners, Kim proposed a debate between the candidates for chair tomorrow night, but each of the other three declined. "There's no point in debating before a four-hour debate," Bieber said. Kim said she was "disappointed" by the candidates' unwillingness to debate, calling it "an insult to the student body." At the beginning of the meeting, three candidates were charged with not turning in financial statements, required by the NEC to ensure that no candidate spends more than $32 on campaign materials. "This is the biggest thing people get charged and disqualified for," Causey said. After over 30 minutes of deliberations, the NEC exonerated two of the three candidates, Jose Carrion and Josephine Lee, but neither won seats on the body. The third candidate, Glenn Kaplan, was not present at the hearing to defend himself and was disqualified. Causey said the deliberations, during which two-thirds of the entire 19 member NEC must vote to disqualify, took less time than previous years. He said that two years ago, the deliberations lasted until well after 2 a.m. Winners from the College, in order of vote totals, were Allison Bieber, Mitch Winston, You-Lee Kim, Jeremy Lutsky, Jeff Lichtman, Dave Rose, Jeff Gross, Kirsten Bartok, Orly Steinberg, Jen Berrent, Lee Egerman, Eric Palace, Jo Jo Graves, Brian Bora, Sandor Hau, and David Chun. Elected from Wharton were Andrew Tsai, Ethan Youderian, Beth Azia, Steve Alexander, and Rachel Caplan. Members representing the Engineering School, who were all guaranteed seats since only three candidates ran for the three available seats, were Toby Dengel, Jean Havens, and Ankita Rhoden. Representatives who were elected to University Council, President Sheldon Hackney's advisory body, are Allison Bieber, Andrew Tsai, Toby Dengel, Ethan Youderian, You-Lee Kim and Mitch Winston.
(04/01/91 10:00am)
Two student government leaders met with Budget Director Stephen Golding for over an hour yesterday to discuss tuition increases and to press for a long-term plan to continue decreasing the rate of tuition increases. David Kaufman, chairperson of the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education, and Allison Bieber, the secretary of the Undergraduate Assembly, both met with Golding in the hour-long meeting. Bieber agreed, saying student participation in the UA's financial aid letter drive proves students are committed to the issue. UA leaders gathered about 4,000 signatures last month on letters asking federal officials to increase aid to the University. And Kaufman cautioned against expecting students to be able to afford all tuition increases. "They can't consider undergraduates as just pure revenue generators that they have to provide services for," he said. Golding told the undergraduates the administration is aware of student concerns and is also committed to keeping tuition down, but said a definitive long-term committment may not be appropriate. "Building a budget requires a trade-off" of costs and services, Golding explained yesterday. "It would be wrong not to debate it every single year. Every year we will have to revisit that question." Golding told the students the University is facing a new economic climate, in which it will no longer be able to rely on "one income stream" like tuition or state funding. It will also be forced to choose among the services it provides, in order to "maintain accessibility and financial viability." Golding said that, like the current five-year plans which the University has asked each school to make, his office is preparing a three- to five-year resource and budget plan, which "will allow people to understand where the [University's] resources go." But Bieber said the UA wants a stronger committment to reduce increases, saying that "there shouldn't be a five-year plan, it should be a ten-year project." Kaufman explained that students are solely responsible for fighting tuition increases and cannot expect support from other members of the University. "I think this is the one area where we're all alone on this issue," he said. "You don't see the faculty or administration decrying the high tuition rate." Golding told the representatives he is not overly optimistic about improvements in the University's finances in the coming years. "The pressure on our revenue streams are going to grow rather than shrink in the next couple of years," he said, adding that the University will have to prepare to pay "a higher portion or share of being a citizen in Philadelphia." But Golding did have one positive note about the University's finances, referring to the economic crisis facing Philadelphia. "The bright side is we don't have Mayor Goode's problems," he said.
(04/01/91 10:00am)
Sunday night marked the final meeting of this year's Undergraduate Assembly administration. And while government leaders admit that the year was not without flaws, most say they are satisfied with the work they have accomplished. Despite the failure of the UA-led push to restructure student government, outgoing UA Vice-chairperson Mike Feinberg said he felt the undergraduate student government achieved a lot. "At the beginning, we organized some far-reaching goals, but most were reached," Feinberg said. "We didn't bat a thousand, but you don't bat a thousand often." Duchess Harris, outgoing UA chairperson, also said this week she was pleased with the efforts of this year's representatives. Both leaders said the UA's played a large role in keeping down the rate of tuition increase, which, despite being the highest ever in terms of real dollar, was the same percentage increase as last year. "I think the administration, the Trustees, and the faculty take us more seriously," than in previous years, Feinberg said. "And the Trustees' meeting [at which the tuition announcement was made] last Friday proved it." "We took the power of the press into our own hands," she said, which enabled the UA to "directly communicate with our constituency." Feinberg said he looks for next year's UA to expand its publication from two issues to three. And despite the inability of leaders to settle on a new constitution to guide student government, Harris said the year's conventions were not in vain. She said even though the plan was not passed, leaders "at least acknowledge that student government can always be improved." "I never walked in and said [student government] wasn't flawed," Harris said. "I never walked in and said it couldn't be better." "I'm hoping that [the preliminary constitution] lays the groundwork for a lot more serious effort next year," Feinberg said. "I really hope that next year's UA takes the skeleton document and makes something out of it." Members of the new UA, who are being elected this week, will have their work cut out for them, both said. Harris said she hopes they will examine several issues which her administration did not adequately address, including the campus-wide security patrol program Penn Watch, the proposed General Fee increase to bring more funding to student activities and social events, and the PennCard expansion. Harris also left some advice for the new UA members. She explained that for student government to be effective, students must be informed about what the group is doing to help them. "It's all about visibility," she said. Feinberg added that members must see the UA as an "April to April job." "If you take a break, you're short-changing yourself and you're short-changing the students," he said. Members must also maintain respect for the importance of the organization, Harris said, otherwise the student body will not have respect for its goals. "People take the UA only as seriously as the chair and reps do," she said. She told incoming representatives to "always treat it seriously and like a job. Treat it with as much respect as you would want other people to treat it with."
(04/01/91 10:00am)
The referendum to establish the Social Planning and Events Committee as a separate arm of student government cannot be binding due to insufficient voter turnout, Nominations and Elections Committee chairperson Marcus Causey said last night. Causey said only 14 percent of the student body voted in the referendum, which needed 20 percent to be binding. He said, however, that the vote on the question overwhelmingly supported SPEC, with 85 to 90 percent casting ballots approving the change. "I guess it's basically just student apathy," Causey said of the low turnout. "I didn't think student apathy was this high." Seniors, whose turnout in elections is typically very low, are allowed to cast ballots for referenda and are counted in the 20 percent required for passage. They are not allowed to vote in the Undergraduate Assembly elections. SPEC officials campaigned extensively for the issue, but SPEC President Lisa Nass said last night that although she was disappointed with the low turnout, SPEC would not suffer because of it. "I don't think it will hurt SPEC in the future," she said. "As long as SPEC continues to have successful events, I don't think political issues will affect its programming." She said one primary reason for asking students to formalize SPEC as a separate branch through the referendum was to ensure its existence and protect it from possible intervention from the UA, which currently oversees the organization as a subcommittee. "As long as it's running well, I don't think the UA could justify getting rid of SPEC," she added. Outgoing UA Vice-chairperson Mike Feinberg said last night he does not believe SPEC will face any political threats. "That's synonymous with saying 'We don't want Homecoming,' and 'We don't want Spring Fling,' " he said. "[A decision like] that would not serve the student body." Nass said she was pleased, however, that the majority of students who voted cast ballots in favor of the referendum. "I think it's a good sign that we got an overwhelmingly favorable turnout," she said. "It would be very difficult for people to get rid of SPEC with such widespread support." Feinberg said the failure of the referendum could have positive results because it will make all members of student government more committed to passing a new constitution next year. "This throws everyone's eggs into the same basket," he said. Last spring's referenda -- which dealt with SPEC, the UA constitution and an honor code -- were also not valid, but in that vote close to 18 percent of the student body turned out, Causey said last night. "This year, there wasn't something like [the honor code] and people didn't care," he added. While results of this week's UA elections were not announced, Causey said between 19 and 20 percent of eligible undergraduates voted for candidates. UA elections, unlike referenda, are valid regardless of student turnout. Three candidates in the election face possible disqualification after being charged with not turning in spending forms. The NEC requires that candidates turn in these forms to prove they have not exceeded the $32 campaign spending limit. The candidates who face charges are College junior Jose Carrion, College freshman Glenn Kaplan and Wharton senior Josephine Lee. None were available for comment last night. Causey added that three other candidates had initially been charged with violating anti-party guidelines, which prohibit candidates from campaigning for one another. But the individual who filed the request for the investigation dropped the charges. Each of the candidates will be formally charged Monday at a Fair Practice Code Hearing, where cases will be presented against each of the candidates by the NEC, Causey said. All three will have equal time to defend themselves against the charges. To be disqualified, Causey said, Elections Chairperson Tanya Young must prove that the candidates are guilty of the charge and that their actions biased the election. Two-thirds of the entire NEC body most vote against the candidates for disqualification.
(03/29/91 10:00am)
The referendum to establish the Social Planning and Events Committee as a separate arm of student government cannot be binding due to insufficient voter turnout, Nominations and Elections Committee chairperson Marcus Causey said last night. Causey said only 14 percent of the student body voted in the referendum, which needed 20 percent to be binding. He said, however, that the vote on the question overwhelmingly supported SPEC, with 85 to 90 percent casting ballots approving the change. "I guess it's basically just student apathy," Causey said of the low turnout. "I didn't think student apathy was this high." Seniors, whose turnout in elections is typically very low, are allowed to cast ballots for referenda and are counted in the 20 percent required for passage. They are not allowed to vote in the Undergraduate Assembly elections. SPEC officials campaigned extensively for the issue, but SPEC President Lisa Nass said last night that although she was disappointed with the low turnout, SPEC would not suffer because of it. "I don't think it will hurt SPEC in the future," she said. "As long as SPEC continues to have successful events, I don't think political issues will affect its programming." She said one primary reason for asking students to formalize SPEC as a separate branch through the referendum was to ensure its existence and protect it from possible intervention from the UA, which currently oversees the organization as a subcommittee. "As long as it's running well, I don't think the UA could justify getting rid of SPEC," she added. Outgoing UA Vice-chairperson Mike Feinberg said last night he does not believe SPEC will face any political threats. "That's synonymous with saying 'We don't want Homecoming,' and 'We don't want Spring Fling,' " he said. "[A decision like] that would not serve the student body." Nass said she was pleased, however, that the majority of students who voted cast ballots in favor of the referendum. "I think it's a good sign that we got an overwhelmingly favorable turnout," she said. "It would be very difficult for people to get rid of SPEC with such widespread support." Feinberg said the failure of the referendum could have positive results because it will make all members of student government more committed to passing a new constitution next year. "This throws everyone's eggs into the same basket," he said. Last spring's referenda -- which dealt with SPEC, the UA constitution and an honor code -- were also not valid, but in that vote close to 18 percent of the student body turned out, Causey said last night. "This year, there wasn't something like [the honor code] and people didn't care," he added. While results of this week's UA elections were not announced, Causey said between 19 and 20 percent of eligible undergraduates voted for candidates. UA elections, unlike referenda, are valid regardless of student turnout. Three candidates in the election face possible disqualification after being charged with not turning in spending forms. The NEC requires that candidates turn in these forms to prove they have not exceeded the $32 campaign spending limit. The candidates who face charges are College junior Jose Carrion, College freshman Glenn Kaplan and Wharton senior Josephine Lee. None were available for comment last night. Causey added that three other candidates had initially been charged with violating anti-party guidelines, which prohibit candidates from campaigning for one another. But the individual who filed the request for the investigation dropped the charges. Each of the candidates will be formally charged Monday at a Fair Practice Code Hearing, where cases will be presented against each of the candidates by the NEC, Causey said. All three will have equal time to defend themselves against the charges. To be disqualified, Causey said, Elections Chairperson Tanya Young must prove that the candidates are guilty of the charge and that their actions biased the election. Two-thirds of the entire NEC body most vote against the candidates for disqualification.
(03/29/91 10:00am)
Two student government leaders met with Budget Director Stephen Golding for over an hour yesterday to discuss tuition increases and to press for a long-term plan to continue decreasing the rate of tuition increases. David Kaufman, chairperson of the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education, and Allison Bieber, the secretary of the Undergraduate Assembly, both met with Golding in the hour-long meeting. Bieber agreed, saying student participation in the UA's financial aid letter drive proves students are committed to the issue. UA leaders gathered about 4,000 signatures last month on letters asking federal officials to increase aid to the University. And Kaufman cautioned against expecting students to be able to afford all tuition increases. "They can't consider undergraduates as just pure revenue generators that they have to provide services for," he said. Golding told the undergraduates the administration is aware of student concerns and is also committed to keeping tuition down, but said a definitive long-term committment may not be appropriate. "Building a budget requires a trade-off" of costs and services, Golding explained yesterday. "It would be wrong not to debate it every single year. Every year we will have to revisit that question." Golding told the students the University is facing a new economic climate, in which it will no longer be able to rely on "one income stream" like tuition or state funding. It will also be forced to choose among the services it provides, in order to "maintain accessibility and financial viability." Golding said that, like the current five-year plans which the University has asked each school to make, his office is preparing a three- to five-year resource and budget plan, which "will allow people to understand where the [University's] resources go." But Bieber said the UA wants a stronger committment to reduce increases, saying that "there shouldn't be a five-year plan, it should be a ten-year project." Kaufman explained that students are solely responsible for fighting tuition increases and cannot expect support from other members of the University. "I think this is the one area where we're all alone on this issue," he said. "You don't see the faculty or administration decrying the high tuition rate." Golding told the representatives he is not overly optimistic about improvements in the University's finances in the coming years. "The pressure on our revenue streams are going to grow rather than shrink in the next couple of years," he said, adding that the University will have to prepare to pay "a higher portion or share of being a citizen in Philadelphia." But Golding did have one positive note about the University's finances, referring to the economic crisis facing Philadelphia. "The bright side is we don't have Mayor Goode's problems," he said.
(03/28/91 10:00am)
Despite an extra day of voting, many student leaders said turnout for the Undergraduate Assembly's spring elections and a referendum on the future of the Social Planning and Events Committee was low and probably not enough to make the resolution binding. Although final votes are still being tallied and will not be announced until Monday, Nominations and Elections Committee Chairperson Marcus Causey said yesterday that the third day of voting was probably not enough to draw enough students to the polls. The referendum, if passed, would make SPEC a student government agency separate from UA. While UA elections are valid regardless of the number of students who vote, at least 20 percent of the student body must cast ballots for the results of the SPEC referendum to be binding. "It's going about like it normally would, for the first two days," said Causey of the turnout. But he added that he doesn't expect last year's "phenomenally high" turnout to be repeated this year. Last year's two-day election drew between 17 and 18 percent of undergraduates to vote. "Before we started [the election], I thought that almost for sure we'd get 20 percent," Causey said. "Now, I'm not so sure." Current UA member and candidate Ethan Youderian agreed yesterday. "I don't think 20 percent of the people are going to vote," the Wharton freshman said. "One of the main reasons is the rain and bad weather." Even if the SPEC referendum fails, UA candidates were still anxious about the elections and made their final pitches for votes as officials collected the final ballots. Wharton candidate Andrew Tsai said he had been campaigning for several hours every day leading up to the elections, primarily in the Wharton School where he could speak to his constituents. Youderian said he had also been campaigning, but that he did the majority of his before the elections by going door-to-door. He said he was concerned about the apathy of students about the elections. "Student government is important because its trying to improve student life on campus," he said. The low turnout "shows that students don't really care about what's going on." College candidate David Rose was more optimistic about the turnout, however. "I think it's going to be a lot better than a lot of people are saying," he said, adding that if students do not vote, it is for lack of time, rather than lack of interest. Causey disagreed, saying he thought many students consciously decided not to vote. "It's not that people don't have time to vote, it's that they don't want to vote," he said. Students at the polls yesterday had various reasons for voting. Wharton sophomore D'Maris Coffman said the UA "puts a check on the more extreme groups, like the [Progressive Students' Alliance]." Regan Allan, a College sophomore, agreed that the UA is an important group. "They have the support of the administration and the support of the majority of the student body," she said. "I think the UA has improved immensely in the past year." College sophomore Andy Baker had a much less idealistic reason for going to the polls. "I'm voting because it's the best way to meet girls," he said yesterday.
(03/27/91 10:00am)
Student Activities Council selected its new steering committee, which officially takes control of SAC today, at its monthly meeting last night. The meeting was also the last of the year at which groups were able to apply for recognition or re-recognition from the body. After hearing short presentations from each of the ten candidates for steering, the body elected five members for the steering committee. Engineering junior David Wessels, College sophomore Brandon Fitzgerald, College junior Felicia Maddox, College junior Hea Kyung Park and Wharton junior Kevin Wong will be next years committee members. Unlike recent years, each member of the new steering committee has prior SAC leadership experience. Wessels is a member of the outgoing steering committee, and Fitzgerald, Maddox, Park and Wong have all been members of the SAC finance committee. Wong said he looks for next year's steering committee to concentrate on "making sure that student groups get good representation" and running the monthly meetings fairly. "If we can continue to do what we've done in the past, we'll be fine," he said last night. "We may be a bit slow bureaucratically, but I still feel it's a very efficient system. It does what it's supposed to do." Positions on the steering committee, which include chairperson, vice-chairperson, SAC finance liaison, Houston Hall Board liaison and Undergraduate Assembly liaison will be selected Tuesday by the new steering committee members. "We will explain the responsibilities of each of the steering positions at the transition meeting next week" to the new members, outgoing Vice-chairperson Greg Shufro said last night. Before last night's vote, outgoing SAC Chairperson Sue Moss told the body about the steering committee's responsibilities, which include publicizing, organizing and running SAC's monthly meetings and making recommendations for recognition of student groups to the SAC body. The steering committee also makes emergency funding decisions if the full SAC body cannot meet. SAC also allocated some of its remaining money to four student groups. After starting its meeting with $13,219 in contigency for the remainder of the year, the SAC body gave a total of $3,020 to the Chess Club, Penn Musicians Against Homelessness, the Debate Team and the Ukranian Society.
(03/25/91 10:00am)
Spring elections for Undergraduate Assembly representatives begin today at locations across campus and run until Wednesday. Additionally, undergraduate students will be voting on the future of Social Planning and Events Committee as an "independent planning board" separate from the rest of student government through a referendum. Currently, SPEC is a sub-committee of the UA. "Right now, if someone comes into the UA and wants to get rid of us for political reasons, they can do it with one simple vote," said SPEC president Lisa Nass last night. "It's like getting rid of SAC with one simple vote." According to the UA constitution, a referendum must receive a simple majority from 20 percent of the student body in order to pass, said Marcus Causey, nominations and elections committee chairperson. This 20 percent, or just under 2000 students, includes seniors, whose turnout typically is very low. Causey said a similar referendum failed in last year's elections, despite receiving approximately an 80 percent majority. Causey said that only 18 percent of the undergraduate student body turned out for the elections. "We'd like to have a referendum decided by the majority," Causey said, "so it's not a factor of whether enough people voted or not, but what the people who voted, wanted." "The UA is a political body, SPEC is a planning board," Nass added. "They should be responsible for passing resolutions, we should be responsible for planning Spring Fling." He said that to encourage a larger turnout, the NEC has scheduled a three-day election this year for the first time. Previous elections were held over a two-day period. Causey explained that students will vote according to their home school. In the College, they will choose 16 representatives from 21 candidates, in Wharton five reps from the nine who are running and in Engineering, only three students are running for the three available spots. Causey said yesterday that no one is running for the one available Nursing position, and so the NEC will again call for candidates to run during the Freshman Elections held in the fall. "Essentially, they go without representation until then," Causey said. Also on the ballot, students will be able to vote for three at-large representatives for University Council. Seven students, who must also be elected to the UA, are candidates. Only freshmen, sophomores, and juniors are eligible to vote for UA representatives, but all students are permitted to vote on the SPEC referendum. Today, the polls will be open from 11:30 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. at King's Court, from 1 p.m. to 4:15 p.m. at the Quadrangle, and from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Hill House. Tomorrow, they will be open from 11 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. at 1920 Commons, from 1 p.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Locust Walk, and from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. at Stouffer Dining. Wednesday, they will be open from 11 a.m. to 12:45 p.m. at the Quadrangle, from 1 p.m. to 4:15 p.m. on Locust Walk, and from 4:30 p.m. to 7 p.m. at 1920 Commons.
(03/25/91 10:00am)
When American Civilization Lecturer Frank Luntz asked his students to run for the Undergraduate Assembly this week, he did not count on the Nominations and Elections Committee getting in the way. As part of a class project for his Am Civ class, entitled "Candidates, Consultants, and Campaigns," Luntz wanted is students to learn what it is really like to run in a campaign. He planned on having several teams in the class, each with a candidate, several advisors and managers. Luntz said that to understand the political process, students should start by understanding the UA. "Why don't you look at your own backyard," he asked his class. "Why don't you start with your own system?" "I'm trying to give you the best chance possible to see what it's like to run in a campaign," he told his class recently. He also said the UA could "use some fresh blood." But the NEC, after learning of the project, brought a proposal to the UA which would be added to the Fair Practices Code, the rules which govern the elections. The revision would bar students from candidacy "to fulfill an assignment from any faculty member . . . or staff-sponsored academic purpose." The NEC brought its motion to the UA, NEC Chairperson Marcus Causey said, because of the money and time required to run a referendum. He said student government receives a limited amount of money to run the elections and it is not fair to students if it is used for a class project. "It would be the same thing if the administration came in and took SAC [Student Activities Council] money to run an alumni reception," Causey said. "We felt that it's unfair for a teacher or any faculty member to be be involved in student government," said Tanya Young, chairperson of elections for the NEC. "The UA is for the students." "It should be run by students who want to be on the UA and they should not be pushed to be on the UA by a teacher to get a grade or to fulfill academic purposes," Young added. The UA unanimously approved the proposal at its March 6 meeting and it took effect immediately. But Luntz, after learning of the code revision the next day, blasted the NEC for barring him from running students in the election. "I will be damned if I'm going to allow a student government body that wasn't elected and doesn't represent anybody. . . tell me what I can and can't teach," he said to his class. "I will not fuck up my class by buckling in to the NEC." He said last night that the encounter with NEC "soured what I thought was a good semester." Luntz explained that the project was between him and his students, and that the NEC should not have become involved. "It's not for the NEC in any way to determine the motivations of students running for the UA," he said. "Why shouldn't the NEC disqualify people who want to just put it on their resume? Basically it's none of the NEC's business." Luntz has still assigned two projects which involve the UA, but no class members will receive credit for running in the election. The projects include one paper topic which asks students to explain their campaign strategy, were they to run in the UA elections. The other project involves filming hypothetical campaign advertisements. Luntz is a Republican pollster from Arlington, Virginia. A 1984 College graduate, Luntz was vice-chairperson of the UA while he was a student at the University. He often invites prominent political experts to the class as guest lecturers, with some recent guests including Michael Dukakis' 1988 presidential media consultant, Ken Swope, and Richard Wirthlin, Ronald Reagan's White House pollster.
(03/22/91 10:00am)
With the University facing severe government funding cuts, students, faculty and administrators have begun to take pen in hand to convince elected representatives in Harrisburg and Washington that the University needs the annual funding. Both Undergraduate Assembly leaders and administrators are organizing letter drives, asking University community members to write to their representatives in protest of proposed funding cuts. Last month, Governor Robert Casey announced his budget proposal, which, if passed by the state legislature, would slash appropriations to the University by $18.6 million. Recent proposed federal budgets have cut funding to college financial aid programs by nearly 30 percent. The administration plans to counter Casey's recommendation by enlisting alumni support. Administrators will send out approximately 10,000 letters to in-state alumni, asking them to oppose the proposal in letters to state legislators. The Veterinary School, which stands to lose the most funding from Casey's budget cuts, will recruit alumni, as well as owners of the animals treated in the hospital. Vet School officials said they hope to reach 20,000 potential letter-writers. Vet School and Dental School officials will also meet with state and local representatives to plead their cases. University Harrisburg lobbyist James Shada said that letters, especially from in-state residents, could help sway legislators' votes. "Legislators tend to listen to their constituents," Shada said. UA organizers said they hope their efforts will prevent the kind of drastic cuts Casey proposed. "Congress is responsible to its constituency," said UA member Ethan Youderian. "If we show them that we care about the issue, then they will respond." With cries of "support financial aid" and "send a letter to your congressman or senator," UA members this week kicked off their annual campaign to political leaders in Washington. The three-day effort, which began on Wednesday and concludes this afternoon, has netted several hundred letters so far, according to UA leaders. The letters, which students are being asked to sign and address to their congressmen and senators, ask the legislators to oppose the proposed federal financial aid cuts. "Washington is turning into just as much a crisis as Harrisburg," UA Vice-Chairperson Mike Feinberg said. In the past, UA letter drives have pressed legislators to increase funding for financial aid. But with the nation in the midst of a recession, UA leaders have shifted their focus to salvaging current levels. Feinberg said the annual campaign is one of the UA's largest projects, with nearly all members participating. "This is a function of the whole UA," UA Secretary Allison Bieber agreed yesterday. "This could not happen without total participation." Some UA members said however they are disappointed with the small percentage of students who have signed the letters. "Student walk by and say, 'Oh.' They don't realize that we're doing this for them," Bieber said. Youderian agreed that a larger turn-out would help the effort. "Of course, it would be great if everyone at the University would sign, but we know that is unrealistic," he said. "Who's going to do it for us, the administration?" Bieber added. "We have to show some proactive effort." Several students who stopped at the UA's table agreed the project was important. College freshman Eric Schwartz said financial aid for college students is indispensible. "Society as a whole gains when more people are able to go to institutions of higher education," he said. "It shouldn't be a question of whether they should spend money on education, it should be a question of how much they should spend." UA members will be soliciting participants on Locust Walk opposite Steinberg-Deitrich Hall from 9 a.m. to 5 p.m. today. The UA will provide and mail the letters free of charge.
(03/20/91 10:00am)
Edward Fiske, author of the best-selling Fiske Guide to Colleges, will speak on campus about pre-professionalism and the liberal arts next month as part of the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education's annual Education Week, taking place this year from April 1 through 5. SCUE selected Fiske, who is also education editor of The New York Times, as the week's keynote speaker about three months ago. He will speak April 4, according to SCUE treasurer and Education Week co-chair Michael Dal Bello. "He has some definite insights into what undergraduate education shoud be like or can be like," Dal Bello said this week. "It's always great to hear from influential people from outside the campus on their views on undergraduate education." SCUE leaders said the week is "designed to draw attention to undergraduate education at the University and to bring speakers and students together to speak on contemporary issues." Eric Schneider, an assistant dean in the College, said the week is important in other ways as well. "The idea is to encourage our best students and all of our students to think about their education seriously and about the liberal arts," he said. "I would like to foster the growth of more intellectual culture on campus." SCUE, Connaisance and the College will co-sponsor the address, which will be in the Bodek Lounge of Houston Hall at 4:30 p.m. College officials said they are excited about Fiske's visit and said they expect a "moderate" turnout. "I think he is someone that most students will recognize because of the Fiske Guide, but he is very reflective about undergraduate education," Schneider said. "He has a sense of what college is and also what it might become." Education Week will also include a cocktail reception from 4:30 p.m. to 6 p.m. on April 2 at the Palladium for faculty and students, to encourage "interaction beyond the classroom experience." "It's a great way to get to know your professors outside the classrooms," Dal Bello said. "It's always good to get a new perspective." As part of the week, SCUE will also sponsor a forum April 3 featuring the deans of the four undergraduate schools. The panel will focus on whether liberal arts and pre-professionalism are "complimentary or contradictory." Dal Bello said the panelists will also discuss their own experiences and "how students should best approach undergraduate education." "It's designed to give students a different perspective or a new perspective on ways to structure their education and the different avenues available to them," he added. Schneider said he thinks the week will help students reflect on why they attend the University and what they hope to gain. He said he also hopes to encourage students to "think about education as a process rather than a commodity." "It's not something that ends when you get your degree," he added.
(03/20/91 10:00am)
The Grammy Award-winning folk duo Indigo Girls will headline this year's Spring Fling, which will be held on April 19 and 20, Fling organizers announced last night. The band from Decatur, Georgia, was selected over four weeks ago and, after receiving a bid from Fling leaders, accepted about two weeks ago. "[The decision] was a combination of what was available, what was within our budget, and what the campus would appreciate, to fit the atmosphere of Fling," said Rob Cohen, a Fling co-director. "With their new album, [recently-released nomads*indians*saints], they are gaining in popularity," SPEC Concerts co-director Stacy Feld said last night. Organizers said the duo will bring an opening band with them and the Fling committee will hire a third band to open the show. They said the local band, which has not yet been selected, will be chosen to appeal to a diverse range of students. "Hopefully, we can touch those people who would say at first, 'Indigo Girls, that's not exactly what I wanted to hear,' " said Ed Gold, a SPEC Concerts co-director. "Our objective overall has been to have an event that people would be excited about and would want to go to," said Fling co-director Denise Rubin. "We just wanted something that people would like." For the first time in several years, the concert will be held outdoors this year at Hill Field. Fling co-director Todd Fruchterman said the committee decided to have it outdoors "to keep it relaxed and fun, and give it a Fling atmosphere." Organizers said they hope to attract between 4,000 and 5,000 students to the show. Irvine Auditorium, the venue for past Fling concerts, seats only about 1,800 people. Due to the co-sponsorship, tickets will sell for $6 dollars, but students who buy tickets when they go on sale this weekend will get them for only $5. Tickets for last year's show featuring Meatloaf sold for over $10. "The ticket price is less than going to a movie," Gold said. "It would be tough to find anything to do for less than $5." "Our intention was to be able to have a concert that the majority of students would be able to attend both physically and financially," Cohen said. This year for the first time, Fling directors worked with leaders of the Social Planning and Events Committee. Members of both groups praised the joint effort, saying it enabled them to organize a bigger event than if Fling had worked alone. "It's no longer one committee looking to get what the campus wants," Gold said. "You've got more ideas coming together." Bill Nicklin, another SPEC leader agreed, saying "without coordination under SPEC, you wouldn't be able to put together something this large." "This is what SPEC is designed for," Cohen added. Fling leaders also said last night that preparations for the daytime events in the Quadrangle on Friday and Saturday are proceeding, with about 18 performing groups set to entertain the crowds. About 20 vendors and various student groups are scheduled to sponsor booths in both the Upper and Lower Quad.
(03/08/91 10:00am)
As the 5 p.m. deadline for submission of a new constitution passed yesterday, so passed most hopes for having a new government approved by the student body with the spring elections. Student government leaders yesterday said they were disappointed that no proposal was completed and approved in time. The deadline was missed after the constitution failed to achieve a two-thirds majority approval in the Undergraduate Assembly Wednesday night. Undergraduate Assembly chairperson Duchess Harris said she was unhappy with the vote by the body and that members did not do their duty to the student body yesterday. "I thought the UA reps did a disservice to the undergraduate body," she said yesterday. Both Harris and UA Vice Chairperson Mike Feinberg criticized many representatives who voted not to put the constitution on the ballot for failing to attend constitutional conventions held throughout the year and for not trying to learn about the proposal. "There are some [UA members]. . . who put in no effort at all to educate themselves on the constitutional issue," Feinberg said in a letter to all UA representatives yesterday. "They were clueless due to complete, unexcused negligence." But Tex Roper, the first constitutional convention delegate to criticize the document openly, said the representatives who voted against the document "voted responsibly." "The convention had more than enough participants," he said. "If it had a deficiency, it was in having too many delegates and not too few." He added that the sheer number of delegates prevented a solid consensus from forming. The deadline, imposed by the Nominations and Elections Committee several weeks ago, sparked a rash of eleventh-hour meetings and compromises by the constitutional convention. Many of the compromises, some delegates said, were made solely to complete a proposal in time for the deadline. "Unfortunately in the course of things and trying to accomodate the shifting coalitions, you discovered that you were trying to build a castle on shifting sand," said Roper, a constitutional convention delegate. "When they got done and looked at it, they were embarrassed." "There were issues in the final version that 80 percent of the constitutional convention did not agree with," Emily Nichols, an at-large delegate to the convention and former chairperson of Connaisance, said Wednesday night "It wasn't a good working constitution," she added. "You couldn't run a student government under this constitution." Before the vote Wednesday, UA leaders called on the assembly to place the document on the ballot to allow students to decide on its merits. But members refused, saying they had not had time to become familiar with its content and that the student leaders who prepared it no longer supported it. Even though the document will not be placed on the spring ballot, leaders said the work of the year-long convention was not for naught. "I don't think all was lost because it wasn't done this spring," Harris said. "I think it brought together student leaders that wouldn't have gotten together. It increased communication and gave people a great working knowledge of the five constitutions [of each of the government branches.]." The government which failed to win approval called for increased communication within an envisioned "Student Government Association." Much of the power of the structure would have been focused within a redesigned Undergraduate Assembly. The assembly would have been increased from 33 members to over 40, with the change coming primarily from the addition of student group representatives to the body. Most representatives would also have been elected by their classmates, rather than by those in their home school, as in the current system. While some said they were disappointed that the document will not be voted on, they said they are counting on UA members to continue the work of redesigning government next year. "I don't think they should put the idea aside," Harris said. "I don't think if it continues in the fall that that's a failing [of this year's work.]" They also look for the new convention delegates to use many of the goals which were set throughout the course of this year's convention. Roper said the process was "instructive" since it increased awareness of student government leaders of each others' concerns. "A number of important issues were explored," he said. "Those who participate will remember what those issues are and may be able to reach a consensus in the future."
(03/07/91 10:00am)
Undergraduate Assembly members voted last night not to place its newly-drafted constitution on the spring ballot, defying the wishes of the UA leadership and possibly killing the work of the year-long constitutional convention. After debate that raged for over an hour, UA leaders could not muster the required two-thirds majority to make the constitution a referendum, to be voted on by the student body. The assembly voted 17 in favor and nine opposed with two abstentions -- well short of the 22 positive votes required for passage. While the possibility exists that the constitution could still make the ballot, leaders would have to gather 200 signatures of undergraduates to do so. But it is unlikely that leaders will get the signatures by today's 5 p.m. Nominations and Elections Committee deadline. Jon Wachs, an author of the proposal, said some delegates to the convention are still "considering entering the referendum at a later date." This would force the undergraduate government to hold two campus-wide elections. At last night's meeting, UA Chairperson Duchess Harris stepped out of character by taking sides on the issue, calling on representatives to put the constitution on the ballot. "It's irrelevant if you like it or not, at this point," Harris told them. "Our responsibility to the undergraduate population is to let them decide." A year ago, Harris almost singlehandedly brought together student leaders to rework the structure of student government. But despite Harris' urging, members voted it down, outlining various reasons why they opposed the constitution. "We should definitely not refer it to students," said sophomore representative David Rodstein. "Students would be voting on a proposal that doesn't serve their best interests." Most members who did not vote for the proposal said they were either opposed to it because some convention delegates are still not satisfied with their product or because of the short amount of time they were allowed to consider the document. "The wording was so bad that there were ambiguities and omissions that rendered it a dysfunctional document," Rodstein said. "I don't think it should be put on the ballot," said at-large convention delegate and former Connaissance chairperson Emily Nichols. "This document doesn't represent the unified voice of student leaders on this campus." "If the version of the constitution that was presented tonight was put on the ballot, it would be a travesty," she added. After the vote, Harris said she was "disgusted" with the assembly's vote. And some Convention delegates felt that the UA didn't allow the student body to consider the constitution for itself. "The UA just took the decision to change student government and they made it themselves," said delegate Mike Gordon. "The UA members don't trust the people who elected them to make an informed decision." "The point of student government is to give students a choice," added representative and convention delegate You-Lee Kim. College and Wharton senior Sue Moss, the chairperson of the Student Activities Council and a delegate to the convention, called on UA members after the vote to continue work on the convention next year. "The work of this year's constitutional convention is certainly in jeopardy," she said. "If they do not continue the process next year, then everything this year was in vain." Several members said they were upset that they were not familiar enough with the eight-page final draft, which had been handed out just minutes before the meeting. "If a constituent said to you 'what's in it?'," representative Rodstein told his colleagues, "you wouldn't know." At one point during the meeting, Kim asked the assembly take a 30-minute recess to review the document, but UA leaders opposed the motion and it was defeated. UA leaders dismissed such complaints, saying that previous drafts of the constitution had been available since Sunday and that UA representatives should have attended the year-long conventions. "There were those educated UA members that felt that this was a workable document," said UA vice-chairperson Mike Feinberg. "There were other UA members who voted 'no' just because they didn't do their jobs." Tex Roper, a Wharton junior and at-large convention delegate, said he felt the UA leadership was trying to strongarm the constitution onto the ballot. "I think the UA leadership made a very serious tactical mistake by trying to shove the proposal down the throats of the membership," he said. Nichols agreed, saying that "people felt 'I want to see something happen before I graduate,' without considering whether it would be good or bad." "It wasn't that we decided that it was bad," Rodstein said. "It wouldn't fulfill its purpose."
(03/05/91 10:00am)
If Undergraduate Assembly leaders have their way, Engineering teaching assistants will soon receive some assistance with their teaching. Brandon Fitzgerald, chairperson of the UA's committee on teaching assistants, said last week that his group is trying to expand student-completed TA evaluations to the Engineering School to increase needed feedback to TAs. Currently, only students taking College classes evaluate their TAs. And after yesterday's meeting of the Engineering Undergraduate Affairs Committee, the main obstacles to the proposal seem to have been solved, with representatives from each of the school's departments agreeing that evaluations would be a benefit to the school, Engineering Undergraduate Dean John Keenan said yesterday. Fitzgerald said that the anonymous, semesterly reviews would be submitted to the TAs themselves, intended solely to give the instructors feedback from their students. "Students in the College have had the opportunity to give feedback to TAs in a non-threatening manner," he said. "It hasn't been available to students in the Engineering School." "The TAs dispose of them as they wish," he said of the College reports. "[That way,] bad reports aren't going to go to the department about them." The College's program, which has been in place for about five years, is run by the College office. For the new Engineering program, undergraduate officials, including Keenan, will have to approve it. And after some discussion yesterday, members said they wanted to pursue the project further. "We decided that we thought it would be a good idea for these TA evaluations to be done," Keenan said. "We like the idea of some direct feedback from the students to the TAs." The next step in the process will be to rewrite the College evaluations in a manner appropriate for the Engineering School. Fitzgerald said the evaluations will give students the opportunity to rate their TAs on a variety of criteria like "Does the TA present material clearly?" Students will also be able to offer written comments. He said that, after several consultations, his committee decided to target the Engineering School for initial expansion of the program. "We were considering expanding it to all the undergraduate schools," he said. The decision to begin with Engineering was reached since, "it seemed to us that students in the Engineering School have a lot to say about their teaching assistants." With the project approved, Fitzgerald said implementation should not pose too many problems. "It's the same way it works in the College," he explained. "We'll talk to various Engineering students and people in the Engineering school to see what changes need to be made to make [the form] more applicable to the Engineering School." Keenan said the school already has the mechanics in place to administer the project through the Engineering Student Activities Council. Fitzgerald added now that the project has been approved in principle, his committee will aim for its implementation before the end of the year. "We're definitely trying to do it this year," he said. "It's completely feasible." Fitzgerald said that his committee may also try to distribute evaluations more often in the College, rather than once just before final exams. "Ideally, we'd like to distribute it twice a semester," he said. "So if there are problems, a teaching assistant will be able to make changes before the final grades come in." "If there's a problem, you want to correct it as soon as you can," Keenan added.
(03/04/91 10:00am)
The year-long convention to restructure student government drew to a close last night as delegates reached agreement on an eleventh-hour plan. The proposal, hammered out in sessions held throughout this week, comes just days before the deadline for it to appear as a referendum on this semester's election ballot. The four-hour marathon session, which was marked by more focused debate than many of the previous meetings, centered on the proposal completed by several of the delegates. Some delegates pointed to the ticking clock as motivation for the proposal to be adopted. "It would have been a disgrace not to propose anything, after working for a year," said Sue Moss, the chairperson of the Student Activities Council. "Compromises came quickly and it became very productive." Some of the primary changes from the current system include methods of representation, nominations and finances. Much of the power within the new structure, known as the Student Government Association, will be vested in the representative body, or Undergraduate Senate. Members of the Undergraduate Senate, or US, will include 24 representatives, chosen by class standing, and five school representatives. One of the most contentious issues at the convention was the addition of student group representatives to the assembly. Fourteen umbrella-group representatives will be elected from within seven SAC divisions. The six members of the Executive Council will include a president, vice-president, communications director, comptroller, secretary and University Council representative. These officers will be elected from the US body. An election board, SAC, the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education,and the Social Planning and Events Committee will be "SGA subsidiary organizations." A compromise reached with members of the Nominations and Elections Committee allowed the split of its functions. Nominations will be handled by a US committee that includes US representatives and independent students chosen by the outgoing committee. "It really centralizes a lot more of the power into the Undergraduate Assembly," SCUE Chairperson David Kaufman said last night. UA chairperson Duchess Harris agreed. "It gives the UA power over the purse strings," she said last night. "It also includes student groups, which will increase interest in student government." Moss compared the new structure to a pyramid, with the new Executive Council at the apex. The new proposal was adopted by a vote of 12 for, one opposed, and two abstentions. It was not the unanimous decision many leaders hoped for at the start of this process in September, but still enough to accept the proposal. "All the heads of student government and all the umbrella groups were pleased," Harris said. "That's about as unanimous as you're going to get." But not all delegates were pleased with the outcome. At-large delegate Tex Roper, the sole delegate who voted against the proposal, voiced several concerns with the constitution. "In the euphoria of last-minute decision making, the delegates overlooked the simple reality that the status quo system was superior to that which has been hastily devised," he said last night. "I think communication is not the problem here," he said. "I think the problem is power and accountability." "The delegates are more concerned about failing to reach a concensus than they are about the merits of the proposal," he concluded. "It's unfortunate that this convention was more interested in the distribution of power than the distribution of information," Kaufman said. "This process should be bringing people together, not bringing them apart." The fight by student government leaders to have the proposal adopted is not over yet, however. "It needs to be polished in terms of style and writing," said Emily Nichols, an at-large delegate and the past chairperson of Connaisance. The final copy of the proposal, incorporating the changes made at yesterday's convention, will be posted at the UA's office in Houston Hall tomorrow for delegates to sign. It will then be voted on at an emergency meeting of the UA Wednesday, where it will need a two-thirds majority to be placed on the ballot in March. During the referendum, twenty percent of the student body must turn out. A simple majority of the votes is needed for the proposal to become official. The first representatives of the new government would then be elected in the spring of 1992, taking office in the fall.
(03/01/91 10:00am)
Benjamin Franklin, known for his 'practical' proverbs, would probably be proud of a new project being spearheaded by the Student Committee on Undergraduate Education. The Practical Scholar, currently being assembled by SCUE, will be a guide to academics and academic resources at the University, according to SCUE Chairperson David Kaufman. "The aim of this is to be both a great resource to students at the University and to show prospective matriculants that this is a great place to study," he said last week. Currently in early planning stages, Kaufman explained that the 'Practical Scholar' will address issues currently not covered by any one publication by pooling the information in many different ones. Up to fifty pages in length, Kaufman said the project will cover subjects ranging from libraries to foreign study programs to computer resources at the University. He said that much of it will be done on computer, so that frequent updates in the future will not be difficult. "First and foremost, we want to be accurate," he said. Susanne Bradford, School of Arts and Sciences director of communications, described the project as unlike any she has seen in her 12 years at the University. "The different schools and different departments are not centralized," she explained last week. "They operate fairly independently. No one school would want to take it on." She said that responsibility for compiling such a project therefore falls to the students, adding "that's probably where it should fall." "I believe that it's important for the students to get involved in projects like this that are above and beyond the classroom," she said. "It's a monumental job." According to Kaufman, SCUE has contacted the provost and the deans of each of the undergraduate schools with the proposal. He said that their response has been favorable. "Anytime the students get involved in communication between the system and other students, it is to be applauded," said Norman Adler, who heads SAS's undergraduate division. John Keenan, head of the Engineering School's undergraduate division, said "it struck me as being a very appropriate and important thing." "[The Practical Penn] tells how to live at Penn," Kaufman said. "This tells how to study at Penn." Bradford added that because the book will be sent by the University to all incoming students, the quality of the book is important. But quality will not come cheaply. Kaufman said that the project could cost between $20,000 and $25,000 depending on the number of copies printed. Bradford said that with that amount, the high-quality book could be completed, but the amount of color and photographs, paper quality, and binding style will all effect the total bill. She said that the University's current budget difficulties may effect the project. "At this point, it is very important to watch the costs," she said.
