"I walked into the SAC office once, and sawthings written on the wall about a woman on SAC inreference to `underoos," says the associate. "Itseemed kind of weird--the place seemed very clubbyand frat-like."
In an election process that is self-selectiveand closed, these concerns are reinforced amongsome.
"There have been concerns in the past that thisis an old boys' place, and that there's not enoughdiversity," says SAC member Eugenie A. Lang '00."This [hasn't been] true--over the past couple ofyears, but there will always be nasty assumptionsabout anything done behind closed doors."
While both McLain and Yarbro point to theincrease of female SAC members over the past fewyears, Markham notes that just three years agoonly three women were elected to SAC.
Lang says she feels McLain's election as chairreflects a more reform-minded outlook of thecurrent Student Advisory Council. "I think thathis election was partly a result of people'sfeelings on the changes being discussed."
Reforming Elections
But some members feel that the current trendstowards a more representative SAC and greaterinvolvement of associates will not suffice tosolve the IOP's longstanding structural problems.
"Because of the magnitude of the problem,anything other than structural change runs therisk of being reversible," says Markham, who is aCrimson editor.
IOP associates can apply to SAC each springterm. Applications are then reviewed by asubcommittee of current SAC members. Aftercandidates are interviewed and carefully reviewedby current members, the new SAC members arechosen.
Once selected, members serve until theygraduate or resign from SAC.
A group of associates and SAC members have beendrafting a proposal that would provide for thedemocratic election of individual committee chairsand SAC members.
"It's not unreasonable, particularly in anorganization designed to foster participation in ademocratic political system, for people to want toelect their leaders," Markham says. "I think amore inclusive voting process would serve to bringmore people into the IOP, and give SAC members anincentive to be accountable to the associates whoelect them."
Alpert says he supports the reforms becausethey would give regular participants more of avoice in what goes on in the IOP, and would createmore of a connection between SAC members andassociates. He also voiced concerns about thecurrent method of SAC selection.
"There's a perception that selection to SAC hasmore to do with personal affinity than with merit,which follows from the currently undemocraticnature of the selection," Alpert says. "I thinkthat's not surprising given that it is a politicalorganization."
But William P. Moynahan '99, outgoing vicechair of SAC, says such proposals need to becarefully considered.
"While the proposals on the table have somemerits, there are valid reasons for maintainingthe current system," says Moynahan, who is aCrimson executive "Many student groups on campusoperate under a self-selection process and thereare historical reasons for why that is thecase--reasons that will be debated at the propertime."
Markham says democratic elections would helpaddress the concern that personal connections andbackroom deals weigh too heavily in SAC selectiondecisions.
"In a large group setting, you have to vote onthe basis of your impression of the candidate'sability and not on personal relationships," shesays. "It's impossible to maintain a personalrelationship with the large number of people thatwould vote in a democratic election."
Some opponents to reform have expressed concernthat open, democratic