Innermost Parts

Finally, after a long delay, the registrar has put up the courses which will be taught next semester. You can see them at http://www.brandeis.edu/registrar/schedule/search.php.

We described it as “a labor of love for Aaron Mitchell Finegold”,
He quotes Nathaniel Hawthorne: “generosity is the flower of justice”.
Jordan Rothman memorably referred to it as “the fifteen dollar booze event”

Whatever it was, the HopeFound fundraiser was a financial success. We raised $4000 for a homeless shelter, and looked mighty fine doing it.

Aaron had this to say:
Continue reading “HopeFound aftermath”

1. Changing Members, New Bylaw

Before Jason Gray’ announced his decision not to run for president next term, he swore newly elected East Quad senator Jenna Rubin ’11 and North Quad senator Alex Norris ’11 into office.

Senator for the Transitional Year Program, Terrence Johnson, is withdrawing from Brandeis University since he has recieved a full scholarship from Clark Atlanta University.

“My leadership skills have grown… it has been a great honor,” said Johnson of his experience in the Senate. Johnson worked with COWGEE, the Social Justice Committee, and DFA. “This is something that will impact my life.”

Giselle Casillas, a prominent member of the Pluralism Alliance, was confirmed as the non-senate chair of the Diversity Committee.

Andrew Brooks introduced a bylaw requiring the Chief of Elections to provide due notification to students for each election, in response to the belated press for the recent emergency election for North and East Quads.

2. Club stuff

The Academic Leadership Alliance was provisionally recognized after a brief debate over whether or not they had a duality of purpose.

The Senate also debated circumstances surrounding a standard procedure for dechartering inactive clubs.  This semester, clubs were added to the dechartering list due to failure to answer Senator for the Class of 2009 Sung Lo Yoon’s e-mail asking why their club did not need funds this semester.

“They didn’t respond to my fucking e-mail,” Yoon said, describing his decision to add the Turkish Student Association and other otherwise active clubs to the list of clubs to be dechartered. “Sorry for swearing, I’m tired.”

Throughout the debate, several senators said clubs can be re-chartered easily. Senator for Castle Quad Nathan Robinson expressed concern that certain clubs, who are active but have not responded to Yoon’s e-mails, will be de-chartered without their imput.

The motions surrounding this vote were indecipherable: Senators couldn’t determine whether they were voting for moving the previous question or actually moving the previous question or suspending the rules to de-charter all clubs at once or blah blah blah. The motion was tabled due to disagreement and, presumably, confusion.

3. SMRs

Four Senate Money Resolutions were significantly discussed this meeting, and three were passed:

A. A SMR granted $141.50 toward 1500 door hangers indented to inform undergraduate students about methods to increase their involvement with the Student Union. This was an Emergency SMR.

B. A SMR granted $205 toward food for a “Meet the Senators ‘DeisBikes Launch Event”. This was an Emergency SMR.

C. A SMR granted $136 toward a lockbox intended to store helmets for the ‘DeisBikes program. Senator for Village Quad Andrew Rhodes’s attempt to add $5 to the SMR failed. This was an Emergency SMR.

D.  Senator for the Class of 2010 Amanda Hecker proposed an SMR which would grant $720 toward a 5K Charity Run co-sponsored by the Student Union, Waltham Group, and the Running Club.  Hecker said each participant will pay two dollars, and the money will go to about three charities. Hecker said Waltham Group needed this money immediately. Several senators expressed their concern with the similarity of the event to the now unconstitutional Ayers/King SMR: Hecker is speaking alone for a club she was involved in before joining Senate, and she attempted to network through clubs and the Union since F-Board did not grant Waltham Group enough money for this event.  The Senate voted against giving the SMR Emergency status, before it was tabled until next meeting. Straw polls taken to measure the future vote were mostly undecided.

4. Reports

Treasurer Max Wallach said the $900 from the Ayers-King SMR is back in the discresionary account.

Director of Community Advocacy Andy Hogan says he’s working on the take your professor to lunch program, which will happen after break. He also said the improved cellphone reception in lower Usdan is “going to happen”, and that “the guy said sometime next week”. Hogan is also planning an outreach for disconnected freshmen in Polaris, to get freshmen’s voices heard.

Senator for the Class of 2012 Akash Vadalia reported that the Midnight Buffet should cost $3308.01.

Current Student Union President Jason Gray is not running for re-election this term.

“My stomach is in a knot right now,” Gray said at this week’s Senate meeting, where he first announced his decision. “For me this year serving as the Union president has been an honor. I’ve been reminded this year how important it is for… all of us to be engaged in the process of this university.”

Gray said he felt the Union has moved toward meeting his campaign goals, which included increasing Union involvement and improving services on campus. “I’m confident in the future of this Student Union,” he said.

Several senators complimented Gray before moving on.

“It’s been an honor to serve with you, ” said the Senator for the Transitional Year Program, Terrence Johnson. “I couldn’t ask for a better president.”

Gray said he will continue to be a presence in the Union next year, as a mentor and source of advice. “We still have work to do,” he said.

Interfaith Awareness Week begins today!

Sponsored by the Brandeis University Interfaith Leadership Development (BUILD), Interfaith Awareness Week is meant to form a bridge between people of different religions (or at least I assume from the title).

For information on events, see the facebook group at http://www.facebook.com/reqs.php#/event.php?eid=72921140238

Just in case anyone cares…

Congrats to Alex Norris, the new Senator from North Quad and Jenna Rubin, the new Senator from East Quad.

Kay and Jourdan here. We’ve decided, due to the success of yesterday’s liveblogs, to experiment with an InnermostParts senate liveblog. As a disclaimer, we are not affiliated with any senators or union members. Feel free to comment. Jourdan will be snarky. Kay might be.

Making plans to go home? The Spring 2009 Final Exam Schedule is now avaliable on the registrar’s website for your all your planning needs. Just what you always wanted…

We’re liveblogging the trial now – snark edition.

Livebloggers – Alex Norris, Matt Kupfer, Jon Muchin, and myself. We’ll be blogging in the comments.

This is a project unaffiliated with the petitioners, defense, judges, or whatever. We’re just providing an alternative, hopefully more hilarious liveblog here.

Check out Emily Dunning’s liveblog below for the “official Innermost Parts take”.

—
OK, so the petitioners (UJ-speak for prosecution) keep bringing up this claim that Lev and Alex didn’t recuse themselves when they brought up the SMR, and that its wrong, since they happen to be members of DFA. This line of reasoning is wrong. Lev and Alex are the Senators of the class of 2011 and represent the entire class. They were elected on a platform of, in part, supporting such events, and their votes are public. The Ayers event is open to the entire campus, and it’s entirely appropriate for the Senators representing Twenty Five Percent of the student body to have a say in that event.

Asking Lev or Alex to recuse themselves in these sorts of votes is like asking Ted Kennedy to recuse himself on Universal Healthcare votes because he has cancer.

I (Emily) am sitting outside Shiffman 122 right now, waiting for the Union Judiciary to finish their pre-trial motions for today’s big lawsuit. If you haven’t heard, Class of 2009 Senator Eric Alterman has charged Class of 2011 Senators Lev Hirschhorn and Alex Melman for possibly violating an article of the Student Union bylaws that states that all Senate Money Resolutions must  be allocated towards Student Union projects with the SMR meant to bring Bill Ayers to campus. The SMR granted $900 for the event, which is sponsored by DFA and SDS.

Members of Alterman’s council are Senator for Massell Quad Nipun Marwaha and Union Director of Communications Jamie Ansorge. Hirschhorn and Melman’s council consists of Senator for Castle Quad Nathan Robinson and previous Director of Community Advocacy Ryan McElhaney.

Several members of Innermost Parts are debating at the moment whether to let Sahar have his own snarky liveblog, in addition to my “straight” post. I’m not sure whether that will happen or not. Hirschhorn is saying, “We have relationships to maintain.” UPDATE: It’s happening, in comment form. Check it out.

The following paragraph is very tentative: according to DFA member Carrie Mills, the security costs for the event are so excessive (over $3,000), Ayers will not be able to speak at campus, the event possibly relocating to Back Pages Books or another off-campus location. If this is the case, the Senate money will be used for renting transport to the off-campus location, according to Mills. Hopefully this will be cleared up during the trial. UPDATE: Carrie cleared this up in a comment to this post, which says “the exact costs are $8,560 for security and we won’t be moving the event off campus as we aren’t sure whether or not F-Board funds can go to off-campus events.”

Now for the trial.

Continue reading “Liveblogging Alterman v. Student Senate, Hirschhorn, and Melman”

The time-wasting UJ trial will take place tomorrow (Saturday) at 4pm in Shiffman 120. Spectators are welcome. Innermost Parts will likely be liveblogging the whole thing, so stay tuned.

to the Justice for a new website.

to the Basketball teams for making the NCAA.

Jordan Rothman’s latest “Hoot” column protests protesting! I normally wouldn’t critique his columns since he’s already in the minority, but this week’s is worth addressing, given the amount of energy Brandeis students have put into activism in the past few months. I’ve supported many of the recent demonstrations on campus, and writers at Innermost Parts have publicly encouraged, organized, and covered protests.

I like to think Rothman and Innermost Parts happen to reserve public complaining for different things. Innermost Parts typically directs its frustration towards unnecessary wars, lack of financial transparency, and what its writers feel are questionable administrative decisions. Rothman prefers tackling the peace room, drunk environmentalists, and excessive protesting. We’re just different, right?

Rothman is too flippant about the impact of the administration’s decisions on Brandeis’s environment. Students are organizing for meaningful causes, including the preservation of the Rose Art Museum, an influential institution, and access to information concerning where our money is going and how administrative decisions will affect our lives. It’s not like we place “SEITAN NOW!” signs all around Usdan once we’ve realized fake meat options on campus have been reduced.

Rothman also binds protesting to the 1960’s as if activism is some tired anachronism. I’m pretty sure protesting has occurred in pretty much every decade. They serve a particular purpose petitions and meetings can’t imitate. Effective demonstrations help the administration match names on a petition with a mass of frustrated people. The “sexy photos” of protests published in the newspaper generate media attention and spread the word. Protests are publicity, and they’re effective. If they weren’t, Rothman wouldn’t have been bothered enough to write a word about them.

Lastly, Rothman made a factual mistake worth correcting: I know Lev Hirschhorn, Alex Melman, and Nathan Robinson all voted against the Executive Session last month. They were also the senators I remember organizing/attending the staff meeting protest. I doubt hypocrisy can be exposed with this protest and these senators, but something can definitely be said about the discourse between the entire Senate and the administration.

There’s a lot to take away from this news article by Hannah Kirsch, Donation goes to Rose.

Most importantly, we see that Jehuda is still hiding information from Students and Faculty.

A donor has provided funds to help pay the Rose Art Museum’s operating budget for the remainder of this fiscal year, according to a Feb. 26 “frequently asked questions” briefing e-mail to Brandeis alumni sent by University President Jehuda Reinharz and forwarded to the Justice by several alumni.

…

Scott said that she heard of the donation news from an alumnus approached her at a conference, [sic] but she dismissed it as a rumor after she did not receive any official notification. “To my knowledge, no other faculty had been told about this,” she said.

This mad obsession with secrecy accomplishes nothing but make Jehuda look bad. And, like it or not, right now he’s the face of the University. Why does all big news come in the form of leaks to the Justice? Why are different people being told different things, and why the hell are people still confused over the Rose? What else don’t we know? Did Sheldon Adelson just buy the Heller School? At this point, anything is possible.

Secondly, we see that an anonymous donor gave a fair chunk of change to the Rose’s endowment. Great, but no amount money given to the Rose’s endowment will save it. Why? Because the Rose is financially healthy – by selling it, Jehuda is trying to cannabilize it, not cut off a loss.

Last, we see that we’re still locked in the paradigm of the benevolent mega-donor. This model is outmoded for the modern age. Brandeis should be much more friendly to targeted micro-donations from small donors than it is now. That was the secret to success of campaigning in recent times(Barack Obama, yes, but yes as well to hundreds of congressional Candidates, Hillary’s bounce back after NH, etc), as well as the foundation of support for Jewish Federations throughout history (up until the 20-year anomaly of the Jewish Mega-donor from the 1980’s-2000).

The Justice makes a fairly strong case:

Not only is business far from a liberal art, but also some think the establishment of a Business major would attract a different group of students than those Brandeis usually admits. Brandeis is absolutely thought of by its community as a liberal arts school; it’s heavily marketed as such to prospective students and is frequently described as such by students and professors. However, Brandeis’ liberal arts identity begs questioning.

…

What is problematic is a continuing rhetoric of “supporting the liberal arts” when the University’s recent actions indicate that the liberal arts have been on the back burner for some time. A Brandeis where ancient Greek, linguistics, music composition, the various Ph.D. candidates who won’t be admitted next year and the University’s legacy in the form of an irreplaceable collection of midcentury masterpieces are in danger of falling off the map is not a liberal arts school.

A main tenet of business is that one cannot do many things well. Brandeis cannot support the liberal arts to the level they deserve while maintaining world-class research facilities and initiatives like the Business major.

I don’t think that this will change any decisions but we should take a clear-eyed look at the consequences of our actions here.

What’s more interesting is that this is a fairly radical position, considering it came from The Justice. Opposing a likely decision made by the school? That’s a fairly big step for them.

I do hope that these concerns are taken into account when designing the Business Major. My take: it should teach social entrepreneurship, not capitalist entrepreneurship. That’s where the future is in any case.

There’s one progressive conference that we all have to go to this year: Netroots Nation.

Netroots Nation is a four-day conference for progressive activists, with a focus on the internet side of things. Tons of speakss, workshops, etc. So many cool people to meet. Such good parties at night.

It cost me about 500 dollars to go last year and it was so worth it.

This year we can all get in for fifty.

That’s right. Fifty dollars for a student registration. And if we register as a group, we get additional discounts.

August 13-16, in Pittsburgh. You in? Leave a comment or email me at

Netroots Nation 2009

The fourth annual gathering of the Netroots (formerly known as the YearlyKos Convention) will be held August 13-16 at the David L. Lawrence convention center in Pittsburgh, PA. Netroots Nation 2009 will include panels led by national and international experts; identity, issue and regional caucuses; prominent political, issue and policy-oriented speakers; a progressive film screening series; and the most concentrated gathering of progressive bloggers to date.

Students! We want you at Netroots Nation 2009

Time magazine calls 2008 “the year of the youth vote.” At Netroots Nation, we hope to make every year about successful youth organizing.

Because we aim to continually bring new voices into the progressive movement, for the first time ever, we are offering a special student rate for those enrolled at least half-time at a high school, community college, trade school or university.

For just $50, you can participate in four days of insightful panels, training sessions and networking opportunities at the grassroots event of the year–the annual Netroots Nation convention to be held in Pittsburgh August 13–16.

Tomorrow:

SEA is hosting a panel discussion about the pros and cons about the future of CLEAN COAL — a major energy buzzword this political season. Want to learn more about this hot topic? Then please come out to:

Clean Coal: Solution to the Energy Crisis?
Wednesday, March 5th, 5pm
Geller Conference Room, Upper Sherman

World coal consumption is about 6.2 billion tons annually. Ninety percent of America’s electricity comes from coal. “Clean coal” is on the tip of every politician’s tongues– does the answer to our climate change crisis lie in this new technology? What could make burning coal “clean,” and is this an appropriate solution?

Come hear and participate in a discussion between Michael Brune, Director of the Rainforest Action Network, and Adam Zemel, Analyst at the Breakthrough Institute (and Brandeis student) about the future of clean coal.

Need some context? Check out:
http://ran.org/issues/energy/
or http://thebreakthrough.org/blog/adam-zemel/

Hope to see you there!

I saw the headline of a Hoot editorial: “Once a Student, Always a Stakeholder”, and I was kinda excited.

It’s only an accident of history that I get to be on the Brandeis campus during this inflection point in its history. But will I be any less attached to Brandeis the day after graduation? Will I not still believe in its ideals, and push for the fulfillment of its potential? Then why should my voice count any less?

There is a shameful lack of Alumni participation in Brandeis affairs. Alumni were once students. Like it or not, they are tied once to Brandeis’ success or failure through their degrees, and many times over through the heart. Not all alumni feel way, of course, but many do. These people are Brandeis citizens as much as I am, and deserve to have the same power to influence decisions as I do.

Ideally, Alumni should have just as much access as students do. They should have seats on CARS subcommittees and be able to access forums and propose ideas to the Board of Trustees. I thought the Hoot editorial was responding to that situation. Instead they wrote some vague tract on how students should be more involved, etc. Which is correct, but something else entirely.

A proposed amendment to the Justice front-page info-graphic:

So the University is part of an effort to change Massachusetts Law so that it can draw more money out of its endowment. Currently the law doesn’t allow Brandeis (and other Universities) to draw the principal out of its endowment, only the interest. Brandeis is a young University, founded in 1948, so we have a lot of principal compared to interest, and are therefore badly hurt by the current law.

For a good primer and analysis of the current situation, check out Loki’s previous post on the subject or this Portfolio blog post.

Bernstein-Marcus (aka the Brandeis Administration) has presented the need to close the Rose as driven by Mass. Law that didn’t allow them to draw from the endowment. However, they’ve lately said that even if UPMIFA was passed (and they could draw from the principal of the endowment) they might still close the Rose.

In other words, Brandeis said that they were forced to close the Rose due to Mass Law, but refuses to say that they’ll save the Rose if that law were changed according to their needs.

Now that Brandeis is trying to change the law, Jehuda must put out a public statement saying that if the effort is successful, we’ll save the Rose. To do otherwise would be to say that a temporary dip in the endowment is worse than permanently closing an essential part of the Brandeis character.

Breaking news – no class tomorrow.
Don’t believe me? Dial 62625 on your room phone to reach the “Snow Day Hotline”.

So did you catch the latest Justice? This issue is one of the good ones.

I particularly like the article “Semantics over substance: Shifting language confuses Rose decision” by Hannah Kirsch and Mike Prada.

But while the language of the initial decision may have changed, the University’s intentions have remained the same. The Rose will still transition from a public museum to a teaching space for the school, and the University will still sell the art if necessary in order to help alleviate its financial troubles. The confusion that has permeated the Rose situation lies in the University’s words, not its intended actions.

This is perhaps the strongest stand the Justice has taken in calling out Berstein-Marcus in my memory. The rest of the article mostly catalogs the contradictory public statements and the existence of public forums throughout the Rose art debacle.

This article also has a neat info-graphic:

The Justice also has an informative article on what the CARS committee is up to, as well as how the University is trying to change Massachussetts policy so that it can draw more money out of the endowment.

Members of the CARS committee Wednesday answered questions about three academic restructuring plans. Adam Jaffe, Dean of the Arts and Sciences and CARS chair, said the following changes are being planned: new general requirements starting for the class of 2014, a new Business Major, a new Media, Communications, and Society Major, and the “Justice Brandeis Semester”. Some highlights of the responses they gave for each program are after the cut.

Continue reading “What you missed at the town hall”

Louis Brandeis’s ex-niece has sent out an open letter to Jehuda and the administration. She quotes Louis Brandeis to show that in his work building the University of Louisville, he absolutely considered an art museum essential.

Second. The beginning of an art collection. Living among things of beauty is a help toward culture and the life worthwhile. But the function of a university in respect to the fine arts is not limited to promoting understanding and appreciation. It should strive to awaken the slumbering creative instinct, to encourage its exercise and development, to stimulate production. …

Here’s Michael Rush reading out the whole of her letter:

The conclusion:

I hope the above makes apparent, by assessing the art collection as merely a disposable financial asset rather than as the culturally and intellectually valuable ensemble that it is, your university’s trustees and your administration have proposed to act not only without full appreciation of core objectives of any university, but against those that Justice Brandeis himself most actively fostered. I therefore urge you to abandon any plans of selling any portion whatsoever of the art collection of the Rose Museum, or of diminishing its role.

Louis Brandeis would be ashamed of any University selling art in his name. What a sad sight.

Continue reading “Louis Brandeis’ Great-Niece Speaks Out”

The latest idea to emerge from the CARS committees is a proposal for a required semester of Service to Society (STS). The proposal originates from the problem that Brandeis will face over the next five years as it increases enrollment from 3,200 to 3,700. Brandeis will have to figure where these students will live and where they will eat, on a campus that already has overcrowded dorms and long lines at dining halls.

This proposed solution would require every Brandeis student to spend one of his or her eight semesters off-campus engaging in some sort of public service. For many students this will mean an internship at a non-profit somewhere, for others it could mean intensive scientific research. During this semester students would earn the course credit equivalent to taking two or three courses, and pay tuition at a reduced rate (perhaps to the tune of 60%). The STS semester could be completed during summer vacation, enabling students to graduate in three and a half years. Or it could be taken during the regular academic school year, ensuring a normal four-year graduation time.

Continue reading “Brandeis Students Could Serve a Semester to Society”