Amid Boston Overdose Crisis, a Pair of Harvard Students Are Bringing Narcan to the Red Line


At First Cambridge City Council Election Forum, Candidates Clash Over Building Emissions


Harvard’s Updated Sustainability Plan Garners Optimistic Responses from Student Climate Activists


‘Sunroof’ Singer Nicky Youre Lights Up Harvard Yard at Crimson Jam


‘The Architect of the Whole Plan’: Harvard Law Graduate Ken Chesebro’s Path to Jan. 6


The Mail


To the Editors of The Crimson:

On Saturday, December 9, 1972, The Crimson in its "News in Review" section came out with an uncharacteristically misinformed and prejudiced article on the ACSR elections.

Steven Luxenberg reported that CHUL had recommended to Dean Whitlock to have the ACSR elections held in accordance with the CHUL model (one student elected from each House). The implication was that such a procedure would still be a popularity contest.

Actually what was really decided was to have the elections run along the Committee on Undergraduate Education (CUE) model--two students elected from each House and then from a group of about thirty; the students will fight it out and decide who should be the two students to represent them on the full student-faculty body. This plan is obviously a significant improvement over the misdirected plan for university-wide elections. The thirty-member caucus is not only a far superior mechanism for electing the two students, but it will also continue on and serve as a link between the Houses and the two student representatives. Mitchell Wolfe   CHUL Ren. from Lowell House

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.