The poster-ripping, politicking Rasputin portrayed by the Crimson during the last two weeks bears little resemblance to the Rudd Coffey we know and respect.

On April 10, The Crimson wrote that Rudd "seems determined to become [U.C.] president at any cost." The author cites as evidence: Rudd has postered in the Yard and placed table-tents in some dining halls. We can assure you he has done more than this. He has chalked lecture hall blackboards, gone door-to-door, made countless announcements in classrooms and houses, and even established his own campaign webpage (http://www.fas.harvard.edu/~coffey/). However, he has never, to the best of our knowledge, violated any of the rules governing the conduct of this campaign nor would he ever consider doing so.

Each of us knows Rudd in a different capacity, but all of us agree his commitment to improving the lives of Harvard students is genuine and resolute. The Crimson fails to acknowledge the way Rudd's experience and accomplishments on the Council testify to this commitment.

In Saturday's Crimson, in a column endorsing Presidential candidate Matt Bakal ("Bakal for UC President," April 13, 1996), Nancy Raine Reyes wrote that "some of the most impressive achievements of the Council have been things like shuttle buses to Yale or to Logan Airport." What she fails to mention is that Rudd provided both these services as well as other "vital and important" initiatives like more bike racks in the Yard, longer MAC hours and council support of the PBHA rally.

In addition to these "smaller" services, Rudd has been responsible for a number of the council's most successful "big-ticket" projects--things like the Gala Ball, SpringFest (remember the free beer?) and a $12,000 (20 percent) increase in the student group grants fund.

The Crimson asks what Rudd has to offer "a council which has already rejected him for both of its highest positions."

Less than a year ago, The Crimson endorsed Rudd in his first campaign for council president. Following this election, your editorialists did not read the victory of his opponent (who had previously been censured and almost expelled form the council) as a sign that Rudd had nothing to offer. Instead, you suggested that Rudd's defeat was proof that the council was incapable of responsibly electing its own leaders. [Editors note: The Crimson Staff never made such a suggestion.]

We agree. Rudd lost his two previous elections because a cadre of self-obsessed and corrupt members of the old U.C. did not like his message. They did not want to hear about their responsibility to put students first.

For the first time, the president of the Undergraduate Council will be elected by the entire student body. In the popular forum, we believe Rudd's ideas--from the conversion of the Linnaean St. squash courts into a multicultural student center to the updating of equipment at the MAC--will receive the support they have long deserved.

We respect Rudd's integrity. We respect Rudd's proven commitment to students and the Undergraduate Council. Most of all, we respect Rudd's vision of the College-wide community we might someday develop here at Harvard. We urge you to strive for greater accuracy and objectivity in your coverage of his campaign and we urge the student body to make Rudd Wakefield Coffey the next president of the Undergraduate Council. --David Bonfili '96   Manisha Bharti '98   Phil Kaufman '98,   Hahrie Han '97   Eugene Kim '96   Sandip Madhavareddy '98-'97   Joseph Sena '99   Catherine Rucker '99   Aarti Shah '97   Bert Huang '96   Aldonna Clottey '96   Adriane Smith '96   Sheila Swaroop '97-'96   John Turner '97   Sue S. Lee '96   Kevin Scott '97   Andwele Lewis '98   Nisha Hitchman '98