Some criticism has been made of the decision by the Great Issues Committee a few weeks ago, referring to the 8-3 vote against bringing Newt Gingrich to campus in the spring. As members of the GIC, we take issue with some of the objections that have been directed at this SGA subcommittee. It is only fair to explain first the purpose for which the committee exists and to dispel some obvious myths that seem to be held by some. GIC was formed to “stimulate insightful, provocative debate on current issues that will inform and educate as a service to the Saint Louis University Community.” “All speakers are meant to engage the community, in a healthy and informative debate and discussion over numerous current issues and events garnering national attention.”
That being said, the decision to vote down the Newt proposal was within the framework of this mission statement. However, the statement’s ambiguous nature leaves some room for interpretation, which is left up to the GIC members. The “open” meeting, where a committee member first introduced the proposal, stimulated much debate-not on former Congressman Gingrich’s merits, but on his “current” relevance and possible interest to the SLU community. The decision was postponed a week, and each committee member asked around campus about bringing Newt to speak. The straw poll revealed little or no interest when Gingrich’s name was mentioned, and further a party was raised when the $10,000 price tag was added (one third of the GIC budget). This was the same response that the previous year’s GIC members got when they asked around campus about bringing Newt. Another year did not seem to stimulate interest either way.
Taking these findings to the next meeting, and after much debate, a resounding “no” was tallied from the votes. Such an “unbeatable price” for a former Speaker of the House, kicked out by his own Republican party, should be beneficial to the SLU community at large and not a select few.
We thought that many more diverse speakers who champion specific issues could be brought for a similar fee-specific topics like terrorism, which is why the committee is bringing former head of FBI’s antiterrorism task force, Danny Coulson, to speak here at the end of November. Recent suggestions for other speakers include Maya Angelou, tri-athlete Mark Allen, and anti-violence advocate and Mohandas Gandhi’s grandson, Arun Gandhi. Bringing speakers other than white males does not make us liberal, but students seeking a different perspective. That is the goal of a Jesuit, liberal arts education.
We applaud the College Republicans for taking the initiative to create the proposal and presenting it to our committee. All other groups on campus are welcome to do the same. The committee encourages all students to suggest potential speakers, since it is your money that we are spending.
All are invited to come to our open meetings at 8p.m. on Monday evenings in the Lower Level BMC student suites. Feel free to bring any questions or problems to us at these meetings to avoid the printing of any erroneous information about our committee in the newspaper and SLU at large.
Kevin Sobcyzk is a senior studying
communication.
