Morals on the lawn

The on-campus response to this depressing turn of events has been largely muted, as if by denying economic realities we could wish them away. Until now. Finally, the USG, the voice of student opinion, has spoken. Or, more accurately, they wrote to us and told us that they wanted to cancel their fall Lawnparties concert and donate the proceeds plus any funds remaining in the spring social budget to Annual Giving.

USG president Connor Diemand-Yauman ’10’s e-mail drew a direct line between canceling the Lawnparties concert and helping our fellow Princetonians finish college. He noted, “Because many of our fellow undergraduates have needed additional help in order to continue their studies at Princeton during this recession, the University has increased its financial aid budget substantially. The University is relying on Annual Giving contributions to help ensure that it can meet the need of every Princeton undergraduate even in these most trying of economic times.”

To be sure, the sentiment behind this referendum is praiseworthy. Almost every student I know can identify one wasteful project at the school, and, with perhaps a few exceptions, everyone agrees that financial aid is a good thing.

But if you scratch below the surface the resolution is actually quite troublesome. The fall Lawnparties concert costs $60,000, which is not an insignificant sum. But it represents only .06 percent of the $104 million that the University spends annually on financial aid, so to say that President Tilghman really needs this donation would be stretching the truth just a little. In fact, the administration has repeatedly promised not to cut financial aid, even in these tough times. Furthermore, all donations to Annual Giving are unrestricted — so there’s no assurance this money would go to financial aid.

Instead, this resolution is just a gesture of goodwill. Or, as Diemand-Yauman put it, a “message that the student body does not take the economic crisis lightly.”

Messages are important, but not as important as action. I often worry that students on campus think that a fancy fundraiser alone — a fashion show or a bake sale — can fulfill our duty to others. The USG resolution would certainly make students feel good, but I doubt that it would do much to actually help those struggling the most with the economic crisis. To address this issue, the USG might propose a resolution that expresses the student body’s commitment to perform a certain number of hours of service. Such a goal could serve the dual purpose of building University unity and, more importantly, actually helping those who are hurting in these tough times.

The other troubling aspect of this resolution is that it implies that donating to the Annual Giving campaign is the ultimate form of charitable giving. Since the USG budget is intended to serve the University community, Diemand-Yauman might have felt obligated to keep the money within the Orange Bubble. But there are other, more needy causes on campus — such as the Student Volunteers Council, PACE Center and Community House organizations — that could use the funds. The poor kid in Trenton, whom these groups serve, is more needy than the Princeton student whom the University has already assured will be given sufficient financial aid.

That the USG unanimously supported the referendum to give to the Annual Giving campaign rather than to the needy communities Princeton students often serve indicates troubling priorities. It implies that, even in these dire times, the best donation is one that goes into Princeton’s coffers. I am sure that even Tilghman would agree that there are many causes that are more needy than the University. While I am grateful to the many alumni who donate to Old Nassau — I will one day join their ranks — we should all be mindful that Annual Giving is not the highest form of altruism.

Despite these faults, I intend to vote for the resolution. We shouldn’t let the perfect be the enemy of the good. And it was certainly shocking to learn that the 90-minute Lawnparties concert costs around $60,000. That money can definitely be put to better use. But I hope that, no matter what happens to this resolution, students don’t get the message that grandstanding and Annual Giving can take the place of real service.

Adam Bradlow is a sophomore from Potomac, Md. He can be reached at abradlow@princeton.edu.