What a difference a year makes. Last Nov. 11, I made my first call for reform of the Great Issues Committee. I felt so strongly about the need that I applied to be on the committee myself. Since then, serious improvements have been made to the committee, and I want to take this time to congratulate those who were involved and to give students a glimpse of what the new and improved committee has produced.

The Great Issues Committee is supported by the SGA and is made up of students and faculty who invite speakers to campus to further the understanding of current issues that are relevant and provocative for the student body. What prompted last year’s demand for change was an event which featured Charlton Heston, the outspoken president of the National Rifle Association. While the invitation of such a talented and informed individual is by no means condemnable, it was the context in which Heston appeared that made reform so obviously necessary.

Students, faculty, and administrators all approached me and others, noting that the significant speakers brought by the Committee tended to be from the extreme right when it came to ideology. Upon scrutiny, I found committee members eager to mention the more liberal speakers invited, but even the committee chairman was unable to remember their names. All of the liberal speakers were small-money speakers who were poorly advertised and, as can be expected, poorly attended. Yet the big-money speakers (Heston cost $25,000, which was 78% of the committee’s budget) all tended to promote a conservative agenda.

Further scrutiny showed that the committee had been dominated by devoted members of the College Republicans, which is, once again, not a crime. But having such an important committee dominated by like-minded members, be it from the left or the right, does present a situation needing remedy.

The last straw came when high-ranking National College Republican officials, frustrated with the CR leadership at SLU, informed me that James Harris, then a strong leader of the SLU College Republicans had bragged to National CR members that his members had control of the speakers committee, and had been using it to advance the Republican agenda. At that point, reform was simply a process of formalities.

Since that time, change has been both drastic and effective. Any choices that would cost the student body over $8,500 require approval from the SGA. Currently, there are seats designated for the Student Activities Board, the International Student Federation, the Black Student Alliance, as well as two faculty representatives, and twelve seats for students from the student body at large.

There are three returning members, and a diverse collection of students. In our first meeting, as we brainstormed ideas for the year’s topics, everything from panels on gay rights, to third-party politics, to Newt Gingrich were produced. But in the end, the reduced budget totaling just under $40,000 limited us to just a couple of huge events. These were chosen with the interest of the students in mind, and I think we achieved a speaker’s list that will not only be provocative, but will appeal to all kinds of people, no matter their ideologies. We will not be serving a limited group of students any longer.

When examining everyday student concerns, we decided a discussion on the issues surrounding the NAPSTER debate would appeal to our students. This was easily deduced by the alarm that was expressed by the operators of our University network server. NAPSTER, or programs like it, are being widely used, especially by on-campus residents. The discussion will be between Ted Meyers, an executive at Rhino Records, and Chuck D, a popular rap artist.

While there was a general feeling that the revised committee wanted to stay away from partisan speakers, we could not ignore the historical events that took place around the presidential election. Events surrounding the presidential debates at Washington University demonstrated support for a unique force in the election. The concern over the elimination of third-party candidates from the race increased this year, and due to the close outcomes had more of an effect than is typical.

So, while the announcement that Ralph Nader is coming to SLU might not please everybody, it will certainly be a very informed voice on issues that molded our present political situation.

In addition to these two big-money events, the Great Issues Committee has skirted the financial restraints initially placed upon it and turned to the community to further enlighten the campus. In the works, we have four panels planned that will discuss the future of St. Louis from four different aspects. The panels, focusing on the media, local business, politics and entertainment, will each be filled by local leaders in the fields to talk about their views and relate them to student concerns or interests.

These events will certainly be informative and interesting, and will give students the opportunity to come face-to-face with those who mold St. Louis and how it is viewed by the nation. The first panel, focusing on local media, will be Jan. 30 and will include representatives from Postnet.com, St. Louis Post-Dispatch, and local radio stations. Bill McClellend and Charles Jaco have already been scheduled. Stay posted for dates on the rest of the events.

The message I want the community to take with them is that this new committee can stand as an excellent example of the effects of the SGA, and of what can be produced when student leaders work together. The Great Issues Committee, which has been almost inaccessible to most students can now be seen as an excellent resource, which is helping to emphasis the Jesuit value of intellectual debate.

I hope that SLU students don’t squander the opportunities afforded them and support the work that their representatives have done. Now, that is a Great Issue with a positive outcome.