Opening the IOP's Doors

On November 30th, we vied to be the next student president and vice-president of the Institute of Politics (IOP). The animating premise of our campaign was this line from the speech we delivered on election night.

“Too long we’ve asked ourselves why so many people stay away from the IOP without understanding the most obvious answer: for the typical Harvard student, even a politically engaged student, the IOP is something foreign, something intimidating, something impenetrable.”

Our mission was to change that. Our mission was to build a campus-wide political community. Our mission was to root out the IOP’s insular character and open its doors to students all across this campus. Though we failed to win the election, this mission must not be lost.

That the IOP offers opportunities to undergraduates unparalleled anywhere in the world has become almost a cliché—and make no mistake, it is certainly a truism: that’s what drew us to the IOP in the first place. But the unfortunate reality is that a small minority of students gets the lion’s share of the benefits. Far too often the IOP becomes less a source of empowerment for students passionate about social change, and more an elitist fraternity for political junkies—a reality that profanes the Kennedy name.

We refuse to believe this is all that the IOP can be. We sought to transform the IOP’s relationship to Harvard students by reorienting its relationship with student political groups. Right now, the IOP stands, more or less, as one political group among many: there’s the Harvard College Democrats (Dems), the Harvard College Republicans (HRC), Student Labor Action Movement, Harvard Right to Life, Harvard Progressive Advocacy Group, various other issue-based and ethnic groups—and then there’s the IOP. And while some overlap exists between the IOP and members of these other groups, there is far less—far less—than one would expect.

This represents a complete failure, an outright mockery, of the IOP’s mission: Often the students who care most about politics on this campus are staying farthest away from the Institute of Politics. And the IOP is not just another student organization; we have a full-time staff, a former Governor as our Director, a nearly $100 million endowment, Ted Kennedy on our Board, and the prestige to get keynote speakers with five-figure appearance fees begging for the chance to speak for free.

In other words, the IOP has what might be called a unique logistical capacity, but several layers of bureaucracy wall it off from most Harvard students. Much of IOP programming is determined by staff, and student influence is limited almost entirely to a small group of insiders, 20-30 unrepresentative students, for whom the IOP is really home. We set out to tear down these walls under a simple belief: the IOP’s resources should be at the disposal of all Harvard students, rather than the province of a narrow few.

Our plan was to make the IOP a home for all politically related groups on this campus. We would give them meeting space in our building, access to the copier, the code to the student office, and the freedom to walk through the IOP’s halls with a sense of ownership, a real sense of belonging. This basic first step would recast the IOP as the hub of a campus-wide political community—a central resource through which student groups could carry out their distinct missions. And before long, the IOP would become a true center for undergraduate political life, a dynamic yet cohesive community, where students of all political persuasions could come together, exchange ideas, and work towards common goals.

This was our message to those who say their commitment to other groups, like the Dems precludes involvement at the IOP: there should not have to be a tradeoff between the two. You should be a part of the IOP community by virtue of your involvement with the Dems, by virtue of your involvement with the HRC, by virtue of your involvement with any of the organizations on this campus that our united by our common mission: using politics as a force for social change.

We failed in our attempt to bring change from the inside looking out, but it is not too late to do so from the outside looking in. If you are part of a campus political group—or are looking start one—and are in need of meeting space and other logistical support, we encourage you to demand your rightful stake in the IOP. This Institute is here for you, not for Kennedy School students, not for adult Cantabridigans, not for a narrow circle of IOP insiders—and it is the responsibility of the IOP’s elected student leaders to make sure your voice is heard.

The IOP is fortunate to have as its new director an accomplished, open-minded and visionary leader in Governor Jeanne Shaheen. With Gov. Shaheen’s leadership, and with the passion and idealism of Harvard students, we are hopeful the IOP can one day live up to its enormous potential—and inspiring students to lives in public service will become a reality rather than a slogan.



Kevin P. Kiley ’07 is a social studies concentrator in Winthrop House. He is the Chair of the IOP Fellows Committee. Ashwin Kaja ’07 is an economics concentrator in Kirkland House. He is the Director of the IOP Skills Program.