THERE'S nothing sadder than an impotent government. The Undergraduate Council is a case in point.

But first, credit must be given where credit is due. The council does a fine job in its administrative functions. To cope with Harvard's brontosaurus Holyoke Center bureaucracy is no small task, and the council's administration of grants and loans for student activity is truly exemplary.

But while the council has managed to appease Harvard's mammoth bureaucracy, it demonstrates an unconscionable--even frightening--lack of understanding of what it means to represent the student body. Any controversial issue--like the Anti-Finals Club Resolution that was voted on last night--throws the council into a frenzy of self-doubt, confusion, and terror over misrepresenting the students.

THE council is possibly the least powerful student government in the entire nation. In America, the student center is the traditional realm of student government. But at Harvard, there is no center for the council to run. No building, no grill, no lecture hall, no cinema, nothing. In addition, the council holds no sway over the governance of the College, and can't even stand up for the most basic of student rights. The administration tramples all over the student body--witness the new alcohol policy--without one word of protest from the council.

Do students want this? No. And yet members of the council suffer under the mass delusion that students like having an impotent council to make jokes about. I've never heard anyone argue so adamantly that the council must retain a "purely social" (read: impotent) role than a council member.

Look at the quotes from a recent Crimson article about the Anti-Finals Club Resolution. "I really don't feel that it's the council's place to take a stand...The finals clubs are not affiliated with the University," said Debbie J. Slotnik '90, chairman of the services committee. This is complete bunk. Who are the members of the final clubs? Harvard undergraduates. The final clubs are part of Harvard's "social life"--the same "social life" which the council pretends is its only concern. If the final clubs are not an issue worthy of the council, what is?

After this total abdication of responsibility, we are confronted with council Chairman Evan J. Mandery's condescension that "I don't think students have really grappled" with the final club issue. Fortunately, Harvard students are not so unreflective. The final clubs have been on people's minds for weeks--since one grappling student filed a suit against the Fly Club. The issue has monopolized dinner-table conversations and Fly Club luncheons for some time now. It's not the students who haven't grappled with the issue--it's the council.

"It is a campus issue, and in many ways we should be expected to represent the students in the final clubs as much as the ones who aren't," said Jeffrey A. Cooper '90, council vice chairman. Cooper has a counting problem even worse than Michael Shinagel thinks the Quincy House checkers do. The total membership of the final clubs is approximately 400-500. It doesn't take higher math to realize that this represents a small minority of the college population. And supposedly, in a democracy, the majority rules.

IN these three statements, then, from leading council members, we have one abdication of responsibility, one condescending attitude that the students haven't "grappled with the issues," and one brilliant formulation of minority rule. Perhaps Secretary of Education William Bennett is right. We need to get back to the basics and give our council a course in representative democracy.

In financial matters, the council should continue its good work and look forward to a doubled budget next year. As concerns the final clubs, the representatives should vote in a manner consistent with the views of the majority of its constituents. Then, once the council has taken a stand, it should be relieved to find out what students think about the issues--on election day.