Advertise - Print Edition

Brandeis University's Community Newspaper — Waltham, Mass.

Letters to the Editor

Published: March 6, 2009
Section: Opinions

Student Union must reverse Ayers Senate Money Resolution decision

Dear Editor,

Part nine of section one of article nine in the Student Union bylaws states, “All Senate Money Resolutions must be used for Student Union Government projects and/or operations.” This past Sunday, the Student Union Senate voted to pass a Senate Money Resolution to provide $900 of funding for a project to bring Bill Ayers and Robert H. King to Brandeis. While the morality of this resolution is debatable, the legality of it is undeniable; the Senate was not legally allowed to allocate this money. The bylaw states that Senate money resolutions are only for Student Union Government projects, operations, or both; bringing Bill Ayers to campus to speak is neither, it is a club project.

In the spring of 2009, Democracy for America made a funding request to pay for speaking fees and traveling costs to get Bill Ayers to speak on campus. In their resolution, it is stated, “…we would like to bring noted activist, former leader of SDS and the Weather Underground, and Professor of Education at University of Illinois: Chicago to campus. This is our highest-profile event for the semester.” In this request, it is clear that Democracy for America is taking ownership of this event, not the Student Union Government. Democracy for America is saying that this event will be their highest-profile event of the semester, their highest-profile event. By taking ownership of the event, Democracy for America disqualifies the Bill Ayers event from receiving funds from a Senate Money Resolution.

The Student Union should take immediate action to reverse their decision to fund the Bill Ayers event. Whether or not the Senators feel Bill Ayers should come to Brandeis to speak, the bylaws are clear in that the Student Union cannot fund the event through a Senate Money Resolution.

Scott Rothstein ’11

Reinharz’s plan for the Rose Art Museum is a ‘criminal scam’

Dear Editor,

The Rose [Art Museum] is financially self-sufficient – it does not need a ‘Donor’ to cover the operating cost.

To the Jewish community, the ‘transition’ of the Rose is a another criminal scam by Reinharz and his thieves to gain control from the Founders and Board of Overseers – and ‘sell’ certain works of art sought after by their friends.

Maintaining the INDEPENDENCE of the ROSE ART MUSEUM is critical.

-As long as Reinharz remains as president, the Brandeis reputation will more closely follow that of its famous graduate Jack Abramoff. Clearly, they are cut from the same cloth.

Dennis J. Solomon, MIT

(son of the Brandeis founding volunteers)