The Undergraduate Council is Harvard College's official student government: students elected it and students completely fund it. Yet students don't respect it.

While 5,581 undergraduates voluntarily supported it financially this year by not waiving a $20 term-bill fee, the council continues to have very little legitimacy in the eyes of those it represents.

As the Undergraduate Council Reform Committee winds down its deliberations and prepares to make its recommendations to the full council on Apr. 27, it is time to confront this contradiction of support and derision.

First, we must ask whether the council is the extracurricular joke many students perceive it to be. If not--if the council does achieve results--then we should ask what the council can do to align its image with its reality. In other words, what must it do to convince us that it is, in fact, a legitimate and worthwhile use of our $117,020?

What we hear about the Undergraduate Council business reflects the agenda of its full council meetings. But often the most important business occurs outside of these sessions.

According to Student Affairs Committee Chair Eric M. Nelson '99, who is a Crimson editor, a maximum of 20 percent of the council's important business goes on in the full council meetings, yet they are the council's most extensively covered operations.

Dean of the College Harry R. Lewis '68 wrote in an e-mail, "I would say that the council works best when the representative or active students work to understand issues in their full complexity. This requires deliberation, discussion and working closely with University faculty and administrators."

The committee on college life, for example, has made strides in working with Associate Dean of the College Thomas A. Dingman to renovate lighting in the houses over the next four years, beginning with the implementation of 400 standing fluorescents next fall.

Lewis also wrote that, "[Council] student papers on the Core have been very thoughtfully constructed and argued." He also noted, "The process of representation through which students sit on committees such as CUE, CHL and CCL has been very effective this year."

In addition to these successes, the Finance Committee, which also conducts its business outside of the full Council, has worked very hard and capably to allot 63 percent of the council's budget to the student grants process. The allotment of grants is a tremendous responsibility, yet it is a very worthwhile use of the council's resources as the funds are the lifeblood of many student groups on campus.

So, are we, the students, at fault for disrespecting the council because we just don't understand it? Or are the accomplishments of the council drowned out by the visibly masturbatory crap we dislike: tactical campaigning, self-important banter and fruitless legislation?

Nelson told me, "We sometimes do excellent work, and we sometimes do extremely silly things. Sunday night full council meetings epitomize much of the silliness that has come to define the council."

Much of the sophomoric behavior that has infiltrated the council is aggravated by an air of self-importance. For example, several weeks ago the council voted to allot $300 out of its $16,250 SpringFest budget to purchase fried dough--but not until after a vigorous debate. Which carnival food appears at SpringFest is an important decision, but do the relative merits of sno-cones and popcorn necessitate full council debate and the fanfare of self-congratulation that follows?

The working out of such details is a necessary function of student government. But the council believes the minutiae over which it has control have major significance (most likely because it has complete control over those details).

We outsiders can only go by what we see: the two campus-wide popular elections have done much more harm than good where council image is concerned because many candidates have come across as petit-politicians rather than students in favor of honest change. As a political outsider, I do not want to hear about political liasons and campaign finance problems in my student government, nor do I want candidates to run on platforms that promise the moon. Candidates should have a sense of humility about what they are doing and a realistic sense of the council's capabilities.