Proponents of divestiture have always been frustrated in their efforts to try to sway the University In 1972. Harvard's primary governing board, the seven-member Corporation, created a student-faculty-alumni committee called the Advisory Committee on Shareholder Responsibility (ACSR) Some, however, have charged that the ACSR has had no influence on the Corporation, but has only deflected student from the board. In fact, it was massive student protests in 1978 that forced the only change in University policy on investments in South Africa. The Corporation said then that Harvard would divest from banks that lent money directly to the apartheid regime. The ACSR, on the other hand, has tried without any success to force the University to sell shares in companies whose South African operations fail to meet the Sullivan Principles, minimum wage, and fair labor standards. Earlier this year, it tied on a vote recommending that the University completely divest.

This spring, a group of seniors decided that an effective way to influence the University was holding it by its endowment. They established a fund, apart from the University's regular senior gift, to be held in a trust until Harvard divests itself completely from companies doing business in South Africa. The so-called Endowment for Divestiture raised $7000 from seniors, received the support of a number of noteworthy alumni and political figures as well as several faculty members. Under the leadership of this year's group of seniors and an entire year to organize, the fund could become a major player in divestiture efforts.

The ACSR, however, will be losing most of its most liberal members and should be quite dormant this fall as the new people familiarize themselves with the different issues. Once it does get going, though, it is likely to press the Corporation on the statement spokesman Hugh Calkins '45 made that Harvard does not look at any ethical factors (i.e., labor conditions, wages) before it invests in companies. Calkins, after ACSR members attacked that policy, said that the Corporation would investigate the feasibility of pre-screening companies before the University buys shares in them.

Student divestiture proponents, especially the South African Solidarity Committee, will likely monitor administration policies and will continue a series of demonstrations and candlelight vigils as in past years. A different kind of protest occurred in May when several students and one faculty member fasted for seven days in an attempt to force Harvard to divest Predictably, the University did not budge.

Although South African investments are the center of attention, the ACSR has made recommendations on other stocks. The Corporation agreed with its suggestion to abstain on company shareholder resolutions which deal with nuclear weapons but has not acted on their recommendation to divest from Philip Morris because the company makes cigarettes.

The Draft

In 1980, then President Jimmy Carter declared that fit males, upon reaching the age of 18, must go to the Post Office and send the Selective Service a postcard. To enforce the order, the Justice Department last summer started a largely symbolic effort to prosecute violators. This past year, the government added a more practical and widesweeping measure--withholding federal financial aid to those non-registrants going to college.

The aid provision passed through Congress last summer, and was originally scheduled to have gone into effect for the 1983-84 school year. But in March a district court judge in Minnesota ruled that the law was unconstitutional because it violated a student's rights for a fair trial and against self-incrimination, and it seemed that the government would have to postpone implementation for at least a year until the U.S. Supreme Court could make the final judgement on the law's constitutionality.

In June, however, the Court issued an indefinite stay allowing the Department of Education to go ahead with the law until the justices can make a final decision after they return from their summer recess.

Several schools, including Yale and Dartmouth, have announced policies to make up lost aid. Harvard has not yet announced an official policy, but it has been somewhat forceful in its opposition to the Solomon Amendment. University General Counsel Daniel Steiner told the Education Department that there are "substantial constitutional questions" posed by the law and Dean of the Faculty Henry Rosovsky hinted that Harvard would provide non-registrants affected by the law with market rate loans and jobs in place of with-held federal funds.

Students have been relatively quiet on the issue throughout, the year with the exception of an October concert/rally held outside Memorial Church and a resolution that passed the Undergraduate Council calling for the University to make up aid to non-registrants.

It is unclear how many Harvard students have registered. The Selective Service estimates that 96 percent of all eligible males have signed up nationally.

The law has created nightmares for admissions officers who, on the prompting of the Supreme Court, have had to implement the guidelines on six days' notice. After the Court decision June 24, the Education Department told colleges that by August I they had to have indications from students receiving federal financial aid that they have registered before the money can be legally disbursed.

This hasty implementation procedure has forced Harvard's admission office to send out special forms to students. But College Financial Aid Director James S. Miller has said that he fears that many students will be away and not are the forms and to will be ineligible for federal aid. He anticipates that admission officers will have to track down students when they return in September.

Funding