“A Vote for _________,” published last Thursday (April 13, p.6), missed the mark. Facts were ignored, suspect reasoning was applied and an unhelpful attitude regarding the Student Union pervaded the editorial. I’m not going to lie, I am totally biased. Brooke Feldman is a friend and I work with the School of Education student government. Hopefully, though, people will see that these are not the reasons I write this response.

First, let’s start with facts. The Daily Free Press started with the ever-hot topic: the Guest Policy. The position listed on the website is that Brooke and Mark DiCristofaro “are committed to seeing the finalization” of the new policy. The Daily Free Press calls this a non-issue, bearing “only the semblance of real reform.” Last I checked, there has been no reform. The bill has not gone through. Stating point blank that this is one of the chief goals of their administration is definitely a stance. This is not Congress; we cannot expect the issues to be similarly structured. Until that bill is passed, it better be the No. 1 priority of any body that wants to call itself my voice.

Next the Free Press decides to tackle the publicity ploy of “Campaign Condoms.” Call me sick, but I think that this is hilarious. College students handing out condoms urging their peers to vote for them is a great campaign stunt. Instead of some useless piece of paper that no one would read, they took it to the next level. Do we need additional contraceptives on campus? I honestly have no idea. Last I checked, though, there are enough reasons for stocking up on condoms.

After badmouthing an optimistic push that would benefit every BU student (additional discounts on MBTA Semester Passes) the Free Press gives up and decides to just resort to blanket statements: “clearly; not much thought has been given to these proposals.” These other proposals are: additional venues where BU Dining/Convenience Points may be used (T Anthony’s, Shaw’s Market, CVS, etc.); online course catalogs so that we know what classes are available before we register; increased escort service; additional communication venues; leadership training; and more use of our consortia. None of these proposals seem like they have been thought out? They all only directly benefit us in areas that would make campus life better. Are there specific blueprints detailing how this all can happen? No, but how can they lay plans before taking office and experiencing what the administration’s take is on these issues?

I don’t know the answer, but I do know that a little optimism can go a long way. If you don’t want to vote for Brooke, don’t. I’m sure that many people can think of reasons not to. But I challenge anyone to sit down with her, discuss the Union and her positions and say that she doesn’t have ideas — that she doesn’t have hope that the Union can, and one day will, be the body that unites us all under one voice.

Matthew Gill SED ’07