To the Editors of The Crimson:

The decision of Phillips Brooks House Association to become actively involved in governmental politics is shortsighted. The flyer we received from Mark Mani and Beth Mitchell encouraging us to vote against Proposition 1-2-3 has convinced us never to contribute to PBHA in any manner, as students or as alumni, as long as it endorses political platforms. How could we ensure that our contributions to PBHA would serve those who are truly needy? Why should any contributions made to a charitable organization be used for partisan political campaigns?

Numerous organizations on campus, both to the right and to the left, were founded with the express intent of endorsing and promoting specific political convictions. PBHA ought to uphold its laudable and unique tradition of disinterested service. Bear in mind, for example, that the failure of OXFAM to gain broad appeal is due to the fact that a large portion of the public believes it to be politically biased. If PBHA is seriously interested in raising money for its many worthy progrms, it must immediately discontinue its active role in all governmental politics. Adam W. Smith '90   Naomi H. Wittes '90   Member, PBHA, 1987-1988