The Undergraduate Council (UC) has earned its reputation.

Most of us write it off, in one way or another: as résumé-padding for the political types; as a black hole for good money, good ideas and good intentions; as a self-satisfying parliamentary procedure workshop; as inept, corrupt, self-important, and so on, ad infinitum.

So why, you might ask, would anyone care that the UC presidential election is here—let alone write an op-ed supporting a candidate?

Take a moment, at the risk of being wistful, and imagine the UC as it should be.

Imagine a UC that delivers on its promises—not a day late and a dollar short but instead, on time and to the letter. Imagine a UC that doesn’t churn out position papers like a Washington think-tank, but instead makes real change happen—not on paper, but in reality. Imagine a UC actively focused on its principle task: improving the student experience at Harvard.

Imagine a UC that doesn’t politicize into the void, that doesn’t curse the darkness, but instead a UC that is proactive and practical, results-oriented, capable, and successful—a student government we would be proud of.

It’s easy to dismiss this as a pipe-dream, but we don’t. We believe a new UC is possible, and we believe that two candidates are uniquely qualified to deliver: Tom D. Hadfield ’08 and Adam Goldenberg ’08.

Tom and Adam aren’t your average UC politicos; both came to the UC after years of effective leadership in other organizations, and both remain active in other student organizations on campus. Tom started an Internet sports company, Soccernet.com, which he sold to Associated Newspapers, who later sold it to ESPN for $40 million. He went on to raise $9 million from venture capitalists in 2001 to start an online education company, Schoolsnet.com, which is the top resource for educators in the United Kingdom. At Harvard, Tom started the successful Swipe for Darfur campaign and has launched CrimsonReading.org, an extraordinary website where Harvard students can save money by comparison shopping for their textbooks. Tom knows how to make things happen—his records in the private sector and here at Harvard prove it.

Adam’s work as a columnist for The Crimson, as a peer advising fellow, as former business manager of the Harvard Din & Tonics (and their $100,000 budget), as vice-chair for residential life on the UC’s student affairs committee, and as vice-chair of the College Events Board give him unparalleled experience and knowledge on both sides of the College divide—in student government and in student organizations.

Tom and Adam don’t merely have a solid record: they have innovative and practical ideas to make the UC work—not for political résumés, but for students.

They want to turn the UC’s advocacy around. The Council has proven completely impotent when it comes to issues that matter to students, from the student group tax to the Harvard-Yale tailgate. Position paper after position paper isn’t enough, and repeated polite requests are ineffectual. The New UC will more aggressively utilize the campus newsmedia, rallies, petitions, op-eds, town hall meetings, surveys, and popular referenda to get students’ voices heard. We’ve wasted enough paper on reports with no results—the UC needs active advocacy, and Tom and Adam know how to make it happen.

The UC shouldn’t have to rely on the generosity of College administrators to get things done. Tom and Adam have a plan in hand to deliver more online coursepacks and other useful services to students, bypassing the Byzantine University bureaucracy. If the administrators won’t do it, students can. For example, instead of passing a position paper about cheaper textbooks, Tom started CrimsonReading.org. The New UC won’t ask for a better student life at the College—it will open up to students and make it happen.

Above all, Tom and Adam believe that the UC needs real direction, and we couldn’t agree more. The Council has suffered from an identity crisis, an organizational schizophrenia, lacking a particular mission or vision to drive its existence. There is no coherent legislative agenda on the UC right now, but in the New UC, there will be.

Tom and Adam have three priorities that are focused and achievable through results-oriented plans: to strengthen our campus, to improve our education, and to enhance our experience at Harvard. They have concrete proposals (available at www.thenewuc.com) for achieving these goals, from creating a student endowment to building a virtual web portal for students to increasing departmental classes that count for Core credit. By driving after proposals that work toward definite greater ends, the New UC will build momentum and avoid the scatter-shot inaction of old.

Tom and Adam aren’t in it for the politics; they’re in it to help make student life better. Their record shows their commitment, and their ideas show the kind of innovation required to make that happen. No airy rhetoric, no hollow promises—they offer practical steps and direct action, and we like what we see.

It’s time to expect more from our Undergraduate Council. It’s time to bring “what the UC should be” out of our imaginations, and into reality. It’s time, in short, for a new UC.

Elizabeth M. Grosso ’08 is a social studies concentrator in Quincy House and president elect of the Institute of Politics. Leroy Terrelonge ’07 is a Near Eastern languages and civilizations concentrator in Lowell House and former social chair of the Bisexual, Gay, Lesbian, Transgender, and Supporters Alliance. Michael L. Vinson ’07 is a government concentrator in Adams House and former president of the Kuumba Singers of Harvard College.

A FEW QUESTIONS FOR TOM AND ADAM

IF you could do one thing as UC president what would it be?
Take action not credit

What is the most important quality you will bring to the office?
Ingenuity

What has been the UC’s greatest recent success?
Disbanding the Campus Life Committee

What has been the UC’s greatest recent failure?
Breaking promises

What is your favorite dining hall food?
Golden Nuggets