This week marks the kickoff of the Undergraduate Council presidential elections, which will once again enliven the debate between two entrenched ideological factions. The right, led by presidential candidate Justin A Barkley '02, advocates a council whose sole focus is expanding student services like holiday shuttle buses and Springfest. The left, led by Stephen N. Smith '02, advocates using the "power" of the council to promote noble goals like world peace, worker's rights, and environmental protection, while "bringing people together" through the conservative themes.

The debate of student services vs. social activism began long before I was a first-year representative on the council nearly two and a half years ago. Yet through inherited idealism, loyal media coverage and a shortage of alternatives, the debate persists, in a way validating it as the correct way to think about student government at Harvard. However, there is a discrepancy between how the council candidates and representatives think about the role of the council and what students truly want out of their student governments. I advocate a new focus in the way both the students and the administration think; one that addresses campus activities and reforms through the Houses by way of another often ignored form of student government at Harvard, the House Committees.

Generally speaking, the social and academic lives of Harvard students are not dramatically changed or improved when the council chooses to pass legislation supporting gay marriages or develops an online book buying website. Students certainly appreciate fly-by lunches and cheaper phone rates, but these are not reforms that will allow seniors to leave after four years saying, "I loved my experience at Harvard." But what would actually improve our lives at Harvard, or, to return to my previous statement, what do students really want from their student governments? A possible answer is ensuring the ability of an individual to belong to and take pride in an organization, or what I like to call group cohesion.

Currently at Harvard, group cohesion is achieved predominantly through student organizations. Students with common ethnic, social, religious and political backgrounds and ideologies have united to create over 200 student groups at Harvard--one of the many selling points to potential first-years. However, it is logical that unity could be achieved through the Houses, the place where 75 percent of Harvard's diverse population eats, sleeps, studies and, on limited occasions, parties. The few House-wide activities that occur have been overwhelmingly successful in uniting students. In recent memory, Quincy House has had courtyard barbecues in which residents touted that Harvard for once "felt like a real college." The day first-years found out about their houses also brought together people of all backgrounds and interests, with students wielding signs, banners and body paint, while yelling and screaming with their Housemates.

To see what a permanent house-centric college might look like, one only needs to look at Yale's college system. There, students are a part of their diverse residential community from the beginning of their first-years year. The social results of this college focus could be seen by anyone who attended the Harvard-Yale game. It was impressive seeing the twelve college flags waving in the student section, hearing Yale singing their fight song in unity and wading among the hundreds of Yale students and alumni who were attending their college tailgates at the Harvard Business School parking lot.

More active Houses would greatly improve the lives of Harvard students, but there are currently roadblocks towards building this unity. First, students need to break free from current debate and old excuses. The council's "student services vs. social interaction" is an exhausted argument and an outdated way of thinking that should once and for all be put to rest because it simply does not fully address student needs. Furthermore, despite having occurred over seven years ago, students should move beyond the idea that "randomization" permanently destroyed the identities of the Houses.

Instead, House Committees and House members must innovate and brainstorm unconventional ways of uniting their diverse members. Ideas like the all-House Harvard-Yale tailgate, Kirkland's Incestfest and Dunster's Goat Roast are steps in the right direction. Going beyond the simple ideas of large social events, House Committees ought to find ways to organize and capitalize on the other interests and talents within their communities. Many Committees are only comprised of a social chair and administrative positions like a treasurer and a secretary. Yet it makes sense to unite, or in some Houses, create student government positions that seek out and organize events beyond just social activities. For example, arts events like coffe houses, athletic competitions like intramurals, House Olympics and service activities like HAND are all important activities that should be utilized to enhance House spirit and unity.

A second roadblock is the administration, which should provide more funding and support for House Committees. Currently, Quincy's student government revenue predominately comes from two areas. The first is a $600 grant from the Council, which translates into about $1.35 per House resident. The second is from laundry and soda machine revenues, which leaves us enough money to fund our House formals in December and May. With roughly one-sixteenth of the student population residing in Quincy House, this amount is grossly inadequate to fulfill the administration's goal of creating a student population that facilitates social and intellectual growth through diversity.