The Sooner, The Better | In your DREAMs, UA

German statesman Otto von Bismarck called politics “the art of the possible.” Unfortunately, what’s possible is not always what’s practical.

Just before Thanksgiving, the Undergraduate Assembly passed a resolution supporting the spirit of the The Development, Relief and Education for Alien Minors Act — a bill before Congress giving young illegal immigrants a path to citizenship if they serve in the military or attend college. Internally, the UA was divided over the proper role of national political issues within its body.

Ultimately, supporting students who enter the United States illegally before the age of 16 and would like to earn a college degree is a noble cause. But the UA has been blinded by delusions of its own grandeur and efficacy if it thinks its actions will have any real influence.

Well before the UA took up this cause, Penn President Amy Gutmann publicly, and rightly, endorsed the legislation. This endorsement, unlike that of the UA, is effective because Gutmann is well respected by Pennsylvania’s elected officials as the head of one of Philadelphia’s largest employers, Penn.

First, a little background:

The UA resolution — in the form of a letter to elected officials — did not endorse the legislation directly. It merely supported “a removal of barriers to higher education” included in the DREAM Act. UA Rep. Chris Cruz, a College sophomore and co-author of the resolution, worked with other UA members and MEChA — Penn’s Chicano-culture group — to depoliticize the resolution before bringing it to a final vote.

Most of the UA seemed pleased with this middle ground. The resolution passed overwhelmingly, and even one of its opponents, UA Rep. and Wharton sophomore Michael Pierce, called the debate on the issue “appropriate.”

But just how effective is a letter from students to members of Congress?

As anyone who has worked on Capitol Hill can tell you, the likely result is that a staffer will skim the letter, write a brief response using a standard template, and then send it back to the UA. The UA will pat itself on the back, while Gutmann and the lobbying staff do the heavy lifting. Indeed, senators and representatives will likely never know the UA passed the resolution.

Representative democracy isn’t all it’s cracked up to be, but this is how it works. Lobbyists speak louder than words.

If the UA really wants to stand up for political issues and voice student support, it should lobby the administration to take a stance on the bill — which, in this case, is what Gutmann already did back in February. Backed by the University’s influential Washington, D.C., lobbying staff, Gutmann is the only person on campus with real political influence.

Supporting students is what the UA should be about, and its constitution gives it every right to prognosticate on “any matter, which its members deem of general University interest.”

However, for the UA to debate national politics without realizing its own futility is a waste of time when there are much larger issues not being resolved at Penn.

To pretend the UA has any real national power is simply silly, and runs the risk of drowning out debate on legitimate student issues where the body can enact substantive change.

Engineering junior and UA Rep. Matt Sternberg said, “The UA is here to support the students and represent their interests. When we start to take stances on issues that are not educationally based, we start to dilute our purpose.”

Student groups should debate national issues when they pertain to students — but they should be wary of hubris.

The UA must be careful not to overly focus on national issues when many students are still skeptical of its efficacy on campus issues. It must learn to discern the possible from the practical.

Colin Kavanaugh is a College senior from Tulsa, Okla. His e-mail address is kavanaugh@theDP.com. The Sooner, The Better appears on Mondays.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.