Dallas Mayor Tom Leppert '77, pictured above, was recently seen on Capitol Hill. David Dreier '75 (R-CA) told the Forum he has heard confirmation of a Leppert run for Senate.

Tom Leppert, the current Mayor of Dallas and former CEO of Turner Construction—the nation’s largest construction management company in the United States—will likely enter the 2012 Republican primary to replace Senator Kay Bailey Hutchison.

A few days after Hutchison announced her retirement last month, Leppert, a 1977 graduate of Claremont McKenna, announced that he will not seek reelection to his current office.

In that statement, Leppert wrote that, “over the next few weeks, with much thought and prayer, I will explore how I can best serve the people of Dallas, North Texas, and indeed the entire state of Texas.”

In an interview with the Forum, U.S. Representative David Dreier ’75 (R-CA), a member of Republican leadership and chairman of the powerful House Rules Committee, commented that he has “always commiserated over the fact that I am the only person from CMC in the Congress.” That fact may soon change. Dreier told the Forum that a fellow Member confirms “he is running for [the Senate].”

Leppert was recently seen having lunch in the Member’s dining room on Capitol Hill with  Rep. Ralph Hall (R-TX). Hall, who is the dean of the Texas delegation, represents the Dallas area in Congress.

Leppert contacted the Forum to confirm he had lunch with Hall in DC, and noted they are “good friends.”

“Folks have encouraged me to run,” Leppert said, adding that he is ”exploring opportunities,” though he would not announce that he is running at this time.

CMC Professor of Government Jack Pitney believes Leppert would be a strong candidate.

“He has won in a constituency that is not a cake walk for a Republican,” Pitney said. “He has a strong business background, and he doesn’t have the taint of a professional politician.”

The Republican field will likely be crowded. Declared candidates include Roger Williams, a former baseball player, coach, and businessman, who has previously served as Secretary of State; Texas Railroad Commissioner Michael Williams, a Tea Party supporter and African-American; and Elizabeth Ames Jones, the only declared female candidate and another Texas Railroad commissioner. Finally, Ted Cruz, Texas’ longest serving and first Hispanic Solicitor General, has also declared. Cruz’s wife, Heidi Suzanne Cruz, is an alumna of CMC, and currently serves as Vice President of Private Wealth Management at Goldman Sachs and on the Board of Advisors for the Robert Day School.

Other potential candidates include the independently wealthy Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst and Congressman Joe Barton, who gained national headlines for making controversial comments during the BP oil spill.

On the Democratic side, there are fewer likely candidates. Two names that have been repeatedly mentioned are Bill White and Ron Kirk. White is a former Mayor of Houston, and a failed gubernatorial nominee.

Kirk currently serves as President Obama’s U.S. Trade Representative. He is also a former Dallas mayor, and ran unsuccessfully for the Senate in 2002.

When asked about Leppert’s chances in a primary, Pitney seemed cautious.

“It’s not a done deal that he would win the primary, precisely because he has been the mayor of a cosmopolitan city,” Pitney said.

“His Republican opponents might say that he has not been as purely conservative as Republican primary voters would like. But if electability is an issue, I think he has got a good shot.”

Over a year ago, the Forum sat down with Vice President for Public Affairs and Communications Richard Rodner. Rodner described CMC as “behind the curve” of developing technology. And in these very same (web)pages, past writers have been highly critical of the schools online presence.

Today’s CMC.edu is certainly an improvement from what some seniors might remember from four years ago. The font, design, and functionality are more up to date—though the organization leaves much to be desired.

But despite the minor alterations made in the recent past, the new website—to be launched by before the start of the next academic year—will be a stark change.

“One of the key issues was to find a way to compare ourselves to our peers and have a very different immediate look,” Rodner said.

When one first reaches CMC.edu or ClaremontMcKenna.edu, visitors will be greeted by a soft gold background, and a cartoon-like background of Mount Baldy. At the center of the screen are a handful of images—each one linking to some video, picture, or text. As you scroll your cursor over an image, it gets bigger. Think of iTunes ‘Cover Flow’ and you begin to get an idea. According to Rodner, these images would change on a daily basis.

From this landing page, visitors can go directly to one of the current gateways (Prospective Students, Current Students, Faculty & Staff, and Alumni) or can click through a homepage that looks fairly similar to the current site.  Some fonts, colors, and information boxes may change, but this page will be familiar to most current users. Behind the scenes, though, significant changes will be made to make the site more searchable and user friendly.

While one constant feature throughout the web redesign is the new CMC logo, it is noticeably absent from our campus. Unlike Pitzer, whose new orange signs seem to be everywhere, CMC’s buildings still retain our old imprimatur. But change is coming. Starting with the Biszantz Tennis Center, and then the Kravis Center, new signs will be seen springing up around campus before the fall semester. Until then, only those portable banners are likely to bear the updated design.

Perhaps the most striking change planned is what Rodner called ‘mobile CMC.’ This will not be an app, but rather will be a mobile-friendly portal accessible from all smart phones. This site will likely start out as publically accessible, but CMC plans to add a gated sign-in for greater use. Course schedules, Ath reservations, Collins menus, video, and live athletics scores would be accessible from many students’ phones. One gated service will be an alumni directory, so that graduates can quickly find the means to reconnect.

Progress is being made on these projects, and students should begin to see the fruits of these labors soon. As Rodner put it, “A lot of work has been done, and it’s like climbing Everest and we’re ten feet from the summit, but those last ten feet are hard.”

Songs, you ask? Yes. Believe it, or not, CMC has songs, and it’s high time that more CMCers knew of them, and knew how to sing them.

First, for the Forum’s liability’s sake and so not to besmirch the name of our beloved school, I must point out that these are unofficial CMC songs. You will not hear them sung at Commencement or Graduation, though if you catch certain alums at an after party you may hear a rousing rendition.

The first song is entitled “Put Her in the Corner”—the name captures it all. This song is not unique to CMC, other school and fraternities sing variation of the lyrics and tune, which can be heard here and here.

Put her in the corner,
And turn the lights down low.
Put your arms around her waist;
Your lips on hers must go.
And, if she starts to murmur
A bit objectingly,
Just tell her it’s the sacred seal
Of dear old CMC.

Don’t say we didn’t warn her,
Because, ‘twould not be so,
About those boys from CMC,
Who think they’re so macho.
And, if he starts to murmur
So chauvinistically,
Just tell him to shuffle home
To dear old CMC.

“Put Her in the Corner,” sung in the key of A, is set to a different tune than the two linked to versions, but is reminiscent of a time when such songs were commonplace on college campuses. I for one appreciate the balance the second stanza provides to the first’s racy lyrics. It is worth remembering the men’s college past that CMC has, filled with Perry Como-esque songs and good cheer.

Let me state the patently obvious: date rape is not a historical tradition to be carried on or celebrated. Anyone who would read the lyrics as an endorsement of such actions lacks both a conscience and good judgement. Rather the song hearkens back to a time in CMC’s history when our then-all male students went in search of love across the 5Cs. It need not be read as a misogynistic enticement (see the second stanza), or a warrant for misanthropic misadventure. It should instead stand as a testament to a simpler time, a tribute to a more romantic soul. It should evoke images of fires burning dim, a last dance, a fleeting glance. It is meant to be nostalgic. Please do not take these words as an invitation towards debauchery, but rather as a challenge to attempt bewitching class. Perry Como would never lay a wrong hand on a woman.

The second song might be a bit more familiar, sort of. “We’re the Sons and the Daughters” is sung, at several official events, in part. What makes this version unofficial? The third stanza. At official events, as recounted by this press release, CMCers are led in singing the first two rounds, but the third and most punchy is left by the wayside.

We’re the Sons and the Daughters of Claremont McKenna
And proud of our fair alma mater;
With friends of our youth, seeking wisdom, seeking truth,
We shall lead on from Claremont McKenna.

We have Crescit Cum Commercio Civitas
As our motto at Claremont McKenna;
We always will be true to dear old CMC,
Ever loyal to Claremont McKenna.

Oh ye’ll take the Econ and I’ll take the Gov,
And I’ll be on Wall Street afore ye,
For me and my true love shall never meet again
On the bonny, bonny banks of the Flemson Water Feature.

The third stanza is important not because it is an accurate reflection of our present student body, but because it honestly reflects our past. When Claremont Men’s College first began it offered one degree: political economy. Even then, the focus was on learning that subject within a liberal arts environment. Over time the college has added majors, but that strong focus on government and economics remains. So it is all together right that we both acknowledge that past, and poke fun at it, in our songs. This one is sung to the tune of the great Scottish song “The Bonnie Banks O’ Loch Lomond”

So what are we to gather from this trip down memory lane? It is my hope that these songs will become better known that they once were. There are a great many things to love about CMC, and I am happy to write at length about them, but given our relative youth we could use more traditions. Traditions only survive if they are both passed down, and picked up. So perhaps it is not too hard to imagine that at a time not too far from now, as an evening comes to an end, a group of CMCers might gather over a final drink and from across the quad one might here “Put her in the corner…”

Author’s Note: This article would not have been possible without the generous assistance of Professor Ward Elliott, Claremont McKenna College’s resident institutional memory.

During the summer we would get notices for lectures we might attend (should you actually be in Claremont) or the hours when one might eat at the Coop (same proviso). But now that we have returned, the full onslaught can resume. “Inform EM:” is this beast’s name, and it will spew minor and likely irrelevant ‘news’ into our inboxes several times per day.

So Much Spam!

The ‘Inform’ emails are, I believe, ineffective and counterproductive. The goal of the system is pretty straightforward: it is a cost-effective means of communicating one message to all students at once, at least in theory. Personally, I gave up on the system during freshman year. It’s just not worth the time to read email after email about new classes such as “The Moving Body: Strategies for Awareness and Efficiency in Daily Life, Sport, and the Performing Arts” or Pitzer’s new Arab-American Literature class. Now these may very well be legitimate and/or interesting classes, but is it really necessary to notify every student that they are now open? Would not an email to dance majors, literature majors, or Arabic majors have sufficed? Could these courses promoted themselves just like every other class at the Colleges, by posting the course title and brief description on the Portal? I find it hard to believe that the fact that the Gould Center is now on Facebook merits an email to the entire student body.

With flooding in Pakistan, no government in Iraq, and domestic unemployment hovering around 10 percent, the ‘Inform’ emails are hardly a pressing issue. But it may be the easiest to fix. It requires no great meeting of mind, no concessions from warring parties, no complex economic considerations. Simple problems have simple solutions: stop spamming us! Inform emails have become like those which promise free Viagra pills or lost treasures in African bank accounts: a minor irritant which stands between you and emails you might otherwise want to read. Except that unlike those Nigerian princes, who just need a few thousand dollars to unlock untold millions, the Inform is a pest of our own creation. The Colleges which provide us with these email accounts can simply stop sending this rubbish.

Now some might ask, are these emails not the only way to engage all students’ attention? There are two responses to this argument. First, because students receive so many of these irrelevant emails, many (myself included) simply ignore them and hit archive. Second, simply because the sender might believe that their email might be of interest to all students does not mean that it is. I would wager that the vast majority of ‘Inform’ emails sent are irrelevant to the majority of the student body.

I understand the senders of these emails desire to reach a broader audience, but I would ask you to reevaluate the medium. Stop the spam, kill the beast, end the ‘Inform.’

On November 3^rd, 2010, Barack H. Obama will still reside at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but offices at the other end of that particular street might begin to move. Recently White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs let forth the earth shattering notion that Democrats might not control both chambers of Congress after the election. Not particularly surprising to anyone who has been paying attention…but rather poorly received by House Democrats. Indeed Speaker Pelosi (yikes!) lambasted Gibbs in a meeting with her Democratic colleagues.

No matter your current level of interest, I am here to tell you that the midterm elections should be of interest to you. What follows (hopefully) will be a persuasive argument as to why you should turn on (TV, internets, radio, twitters), how you should tune into House races, and why this all matters.

What about the Senate? For a variety of reasons (which I am happy, even eager, to discuss elsewhere) the Senate Majority Leader has no where near the control over his fellow members, legislative calendar, or policy, as the Speaker of the House does. Individual Senators and Committees, by practice and procedure, have much greater power in the upper chamber than in the lower. As a result, I would submit it is the Speaker of the House that is the second most powerful office in the land.

And it’s up for grabs. As Gibbs noted (despite his rather unsurprising ‘walking back’) the House is up for grabs. “Speaker Boehner” is a phrase which sends chills up the spines of Democrats everywhere, much as the mere utterance of the words “Speaker Pelosi” cause the average Republican to fret and avoid eating for some time.

So what should you pay attention to? There are, broadly speaking, two schools of thought. The first, and easier to track, is national indicators. The state of the economy, the unemployment rate, the ‘national mood,’ and other metrics are all fair rough metrics of what is likely to happen. The alternative is to predict on a race by race basis how elections are likely to turn out and tally those predictions. (For those of you reading this to waste time and are really looking for an excuse not to get stuff done, you can read this piece or this one on forecasting).

So where to tune? The Cook Political Report is an invaluable source as a guide to which races are competitive and how they compare. His House Race charts can be found here. For those of you looking for a bit more content, and World Cup references, The Washington Post’s Chris Cillizza is a must read. For those of your truly addicted, there are many more resources but a new one that I am quite fond of is a twitter feed @FECTweets run by Reid Wilson at National Journal’s Hotline. The feed just broadcasts the quarterly fundraising results (2Q were due July 15) so less useful now, but good to have in the future.

There’s also the option to drop out. I’m not necessarily advocating you leave CMC for a semester to work on a campaign, though you could do worse things. You can phone bank from anywhere with Skype or a cell phone, and you can always write a check. If you do plan to go the cash route, I will not use this space to tell you who to send money to, but I will say this: go small or go home. Money you send to a House race in Idaho (Democrat/Republican) will go a lot further than dollars you spend to Illinois (Democrat/Republican).

Why does it matter that Nancy and Robert couldn’t play nice? It matters a great deal because the Speaker of the House is the second most powerful person in the nation and the White House Press Secretary is the public voice of the President.

Now you might retort ‘No, Jesse. I learned in Govt. 20 that it goes President, Vice President, Speaker of the House….’ Well, simply put, that’s just not true. The Vice Presidency of the United States of America, august title and all, is just not that important. Vice President Garner once said the Vice Presidency was “not worth a bucket of warm piss,” hardly the description of an all powerful office.

There are two principle reasons why this is true: a) the Vice President has no natural area of responsibility, except for those given to him by the President, and b) the Vice President has no vote (except in rare Senate ties) and has no natural power base or constituency to call upon.

Given our age, I am sure the comments section would fill with comments about Dick Cheney, was he not powerful? First it is worth noting that Cheney is the exception far more than the rule. Second, and more substantively, Cheney’s power within the Bush administration derived from his close, almost Chief of Staff-like relationship with the President. All politicians have close aids and allies who have their ear, and whose judgment the principal trusts. Vice President Cheney filled that role for President Bush, but unlike most advisors, his name was also on the ballot.

What is the point of this tangent? If we accept that the Vice President is not all that important, there is a vacancy in the number two slot…meet the Speaker of the House. The Speaker consolidates the powers of the House of Representatives in large measure in the Speaker’s office, has direct (if not de facto) control over what bills come to the floor, and just as importantly which bills do not. The Speaker can exercise an effective veto over legislation, and has a greater power, more than any other single member of Congress, to effect policy and political changes. This power is amplified when the Speaker is of a different party than the President as the Speaker also becomes in effect the voice of the ‘out’ party (see Gingrich, Newt).

Bottom line: November’s election matters a great deal. Control of a very powerful position is up for grabs, and this will have significant implications for the rest of President Obama’s term, for the course of the nation, and for national politics for the next few years. If that is something that interests you, there are a number of ways to get information. If you want to do more than read passively, you can get involved in a meaningful way.

Decisions are made by those who show up, will you?

OBVIOUS BIAS ALERT: The author of this post worked in the Fall of 20o9 and this summer for House Republican Leader John Boehner. Notwithstanding this fact, this article contains useful advice ensconced in a whimsical and yet powerful writing style.

I would wager that fewer CMCers know of that other 5C alumna serving in the lower chamber: Gabrielle Giffords (Scripps ’93).

It is worth considering where Gabrielle Giffords is and how she got there for a number of reasons, including the perk of being able to toot Claremont’s own horn.

Aerophonic blasts notwithstanding, let us examine Giffords’ situation, as it might provide some insight into the midterm elections which are but a few months away. Giffords, a Democrat, represents Arizona’s 8^th District–hardly a liberal stronghold. Located in southeast Arizona, along the border the district went for John McCain in 2008 by six points and for George W. Bush twice, albeit not by massive margins. Arizona’s 8^th, which includes part of Tucson, is a slightly Republican (for you political nerds, Charlie Cook’s PVI rates it R+4) and is likely to prove difficult for Democrats to defend this cycle. Democrats in the past two cycles have made gains in these types of more conservative districts and in order to retain control of the House these are the types of seats they will have to defend and hold.

(Is it just me, or does that last paragraph sound like a not funny Stephen Colbert’s Better Know A District?)

The district is competitive, so what? Other than giving 5C students the warm and fuzzies to see our own succeed, paying attention to this race may prove a useful proxy for the national field.

How do we know this race is so competitive, you may wonder? Giffords was amongst the first House Democrats to air general election ads this cycle. Though Arizona’s primary is not until August 24, Giffords felt the need to go on air almost two months earlier. Her choice of ad is also worth noting: heavily pro-military/veteran, anti-regulatory (“cutting through red tape”) libertarian message designed to appeal to a more conservative constituency.

Giffords’ voting record may also present an issue. She voted for Cap-and-Trade and ObamaCare, likely to be hard sells in a conservative-leaning western seat. The White House, Speaker Pelosi, and the DCCC have all made the case that those bills will be embraced by the American people, Arizona’s 8^th will test that argument.

Who is challenging the gentle lady from Scripps College, you might ask? Chris Cillizza of The Washington Post summarizes the opposition nicely. “Former State Sen. Jonathan Paton (R) made a statement with $500,000 raised in an abbreviated first quarter after getting in the race early this year, but he still faces a primary with Iraq veteran Jesse Kelly.”

So on the one hand, Paton’s fundraising is solid  (if not out-of-this-world-jump-for-joy-fantastic). On the other hand, Jesse Kelly is kind of badass.

Oh yeah, one final thing: the race is in ARIZONA. You know what that means: immigration. In the aftermath of Arizona’s new law, immigration is bound to play an outsized role (yes, outsized even for a western, border district race). Giffords’ position is nuanced. Giffords opposes both the law and the lawsuit. She is walking a fine line between being tough on illegal immigration, and angering either the sizeable Hispanic minority or more liberal supporters located primarily near Tucson. Dangerous stuff.

So, children, what have we learned? First, there is more than one 5C alum in Congress. Second, her district will be indicative of broader national trends. Third, if the number of Scrippsies in Congress is to remain steady and not drop, Gabrielle Giffords will have to run a very strong campaign against the odds.

Those of you who know me know that I am obsessed, likely to an unhealthy degree, with all things politics. I love the ephemera most of all. Sure we could have a substantive policy discussion about the relative virtues of the Senate and House versions of the Child Nutrition reauthorization bill, the merits and scope of ‘doc-fix,’ or the finer points of PEPFAR…but Viagra jokes and dorky white guys are just more fun.

Now, I do not claim that this is an exhaustive list of Congressional foibles, but they made me laugh.

This being my second summer in DC I thought I would take this opportunity to share with you some of  gems spewed forth by certain members of Congress. Often times Washington is criticized as “Hollywood for ugly people,” well CMC it’s time for you to meet some of the starlets. Let’s take a gander at what the series of tubes has offered us as of late.

Hank Johnson (D-Crazytown): As you will soon see, it’s not a good idea for Rep. Johnson’s staff to let him go off-script. It is, however, fantastic for everyone else when he does.

The Congressman has a knack for asking the questions that no one else has thought to ask, like will Guam tip over if we built a Navy base there…seriously, he asked that.

Ok, but everyone asks a weird question once in a while, right? Don’t you dare underestimate Hank.

Here’s Hank Johnson wondering if his microphone might need some encouragement to stay up. (Yeah, it’s a dick joke)

Here’s Hank Johnson musing about the virtues of our civil justice system. For example, “if you want to know…how many times your neighbor has beat his wife” you can find that at the courthouse… truly strange and well worth the 6 minutes of your time.

Steve Cohen (D – Funkytown): Now as you all know, Jews are world renowned for our dancing abilities. Whether it be getting up on a roof, or throwing people out of chairs, my people know how to get down. That’s why it was so disapointing to see this video of Rep. Steve Cohen. Cohen represents Tennessee’s 9th Congressional District which is almost 60% black (look, a fact!) and so Steve Cohen must be ever vigilant in his quest to show that he is ‘down’ with the people; this man knows how to boogie.

This is why Jews (sorry Matisyahu and Eric Scott) shouldn’t rap. Sweat drenched polo shirt and dockers, blackberry on his hip, this fella is hood.

Yes, there’s more…

Bob Etheridge (D – Smackdown): You might be a redneck if you get suddenly violent when college-age video trackers ask you if you “support the Obama agenda”?

Rep. Etheridge, proof that steroids can ruin any sport…

Congressional Black Caucus (Ethics Watchdogs): The Congressional Black Caucus has picked a fight, locked in their sight is the Office of Congressional Ethics (OCE). Who is leading this valiant effort? Rep. Marcia Fudge. What possible motive could Fudge have to pick this particular fight? Well, her Chief of Staff  Dawn Kelly Mobley was admonished by the House Ethics Committee for counseling an outside group on how to circumvent House disclosure requirements.

So these members might have a gripe, what’s the funny part? Well, one of the co-sponsors is Rep. Alcee Hastings. That name familiar? Well it should be Alcee Hastings, while serving as a federal judge, was impeached by the House and removed from office. One of only 6 judges in US history to be impeached and removed from office. Wow.

Other CBC members who have been investigated by OCE, the Ethics Committee, or the Department of Justice include: Reps. Rangel, Jefferson, Thompson, Clarke, Payne, Kilpatrick, Christensen, Hastings, Jackson Jr., Watt, and Senator Burris.

Alright, now before I get a series of angry comments pointing out that both parties are guilty of ethical lapses, I grant your point….

But seriously folks, Alcee Hastings talking about ethics is like:

• (a) Michael Jackson talking about child care
• (b) Osama bin Laden practicing non-violent protest
• (c) Dora smiling
• (d) John Edwards not being scum of the earth
• (e) all of the above

Take your pick, CMC.

CMC has consistently ranked between 9-14 over the past decade in U.S. News & World Report's college rankings.

For those of you who have not read the piece, the argument is as follows: Claremont McKenna’s focus on government and economics is a detriment to other departments, and it prevents our beloved school from rising into the top ten liberal arts colleges as ranked by U.S. News and World Report.  Nico goes on to equate our focus on government and economics with the lack of general name recognition.  He offers three main arguments for his position.  First, the best applicants interested in government and economics go to more big-name schools.  Second, name recognition is a factor for attracting prospective freshmen and transfer students.  Third, CMC loses strong faculty in other departments because of our focus.

Let us begin with the supposed link between our name recognition and our focus on government and economics.  I believe that other factors better explain CMC’s lack of name recognition.  We are the only top twenty liberal arts college that is under 100 years old –rather considerably under, given that our 63^rd graduating class will receive its diplomas in a few weeks.  This relative youth, coupled with the small size of our graduating classes, means that CMC has relatively few alumni. Indeed, all CMC alumni would not fill the Rose Bowl —we wouldn’t even fill one-fifth of the seats! Youth and the size of our alumni network are far more likely explanations of the lack of name recognition than diversity of academic offerings. Compare our alumni base —likely less than 15,000 —to Harvard, Amherst, or Williams.

Now let us consider Nico’s three points.  Applicants that are the best candidates for government and economics majors will go elsewhere.  Fine.  There really is no way to either prove or disprove this point. So, for the sake of argument, let us assume it is true. Dean Vos has stated that CMC’s goal is to enroll 300 freshmen (110 early decision admits + 190 through regular decision).  Relative to the pool of applicants applying to top schools in the United States, this is a tiny number.  We could not hope to attract the top students in any field, even if we put every resource the college had behind that effort.  Students pick schools based on a whole host of factors: size, weather, proximity to home, social atmosphere, city size, and family ties, among others. CMC cannot be all things to all prospective students.  The campus we offer is, I believe, different from a vast variety of other schools.  As such, it will tend to attract particular students.

Is CMC trapped in a cycle of government and economics majors, as Nico alleges?  Well, the majority of CMCers graduate with a dual or double major.  Often, those second majors are something other than government or economics.  Furthermore, those other departments are not as small as Nico portrays them. CMC actually offers more math courses than government courses (55 math compared to 50 government), and has about as many psychology classes (48) as government. The relative parity of those departments is never mentioned in his article.

As an anonymous do-gooder mentions in the comments section of Nico’s post, graduate schools and employers often know exactly what CMC is and why it is such a fantastic institution.   This comment, though I agree with it, misses Nico’s point.  His friends in Indiana had not heard of CMC, although they have heard of George Washington and USC. Nico was talking about the name identification among peers.  I agree with his analysis of the symptoms, but I disagree with his diagnosis. Age and alumni network are likely to”‘blame.”  Indeed, the school most often garners attention when our professors are quoted in newspapers (see Professor Jack Pitney), donors give major gifts to the school (Robert A. Day and Henry Kravis), or when other elements of those two departments which are “holding us back” shine in the public sphere.

In 1969, Claremont Men's stayed true to its mission, bringing in Senator Abraham Ribicoff of Connecticut for commencement to discuss the importance of service. It was the College's twenty-third graduation ceremony.

Finally, let us address this issue of talent recruitment and retention.  I am not going to speculate as to why Professor Khazeni was denied tenure.  Nico is obviously upset by this fact, and I cannot imagine that the decision thrilled the professor either.  Tenure decisions are made by the Advancement, Promotions, and Tenure committee (APT).  This committee is made up of all tenured professors of the college.  There are a variety of reasons why a professor might be denied tenure, and Nico’s assertion without basis that the professor in question was snubbed is both premature and uninformed. Since he admittedly does not know the standards by which tenure is granted, creating his own standards which show that the professor deserved tenure is not sufficient grounds upon which to claim that the APT committee failed in its duty.

Nico’s vision of a brighter CMC future calls for expanded academic offerings by hiring the best talent to other departments. This plan sounds remarkably like what CMC is already doing. Professor Bassam Frangieh did not appear out of midair. He was recruited by CMC from Yale to create an Arabic program. Associate Professor of Philosophy Suzanne Obdrzalek also was previously featured at Yale. Professor Minxin Pei, one of the world’s leading experts in Asian affairs, is now the head of the Keck Center and an instructor in international relations. One can also look to the two new professors being hired by the history department. These are just a few of many examples of how CMC invests in other departments and why Nico is simply misinformed.

Claremont McKenna cannot be all things to all students; we follow the consortium model. Nowhere does Nico mention that some students come here for that very reason. The schools divvy up responsibility to cover more ground in depth, instead of wasting resources duplicating efforts. That such a young school can excel in two major areas of study— economics and government— should be celebrated, not chastised. Anyone who does the latter did not do their research as a prospective student, and has ignored the most important characteristic of the college process: fit.

Admittedly, I’ve screwed up. In my three years at CMC I have taken twenty-seven classes; not one of those has been a (hard) science . There science looms, taunting me from senior year. Fully one-fourth (and perhaps more) of my final year at this lovely education institution/resort will be devoted to the study of physics and biology—with lab!

I have not taken a science class since the tenth grade—when I took an exit examination a year early so that I could focus on those courses which I better enjoyed. I spent an entire month studying for that test with the promise that I would have the rest of my high school time sans-science. And, you know what, I’ve been enjoying those soft sciences (government and economics) as well as certain humanities (philosophy, religious studies, history, literature) ever since. I thought science and I had gone our separate ways—alas, no.

So what is the purpose of this piece, other than for me to kvetch to a wider than usual audience? My intentions are twofold: to urge others not to repeat my mistake, and to examine why it is we have two science requirements.

The Folly: I decided during freshman year, shortly after I found out that there were science requirements, to postpone taking those classes for as long as possible. I hoped that perhaps the Curriculum Committee might reduce the burden or alter the requirements in some way as to alleviate my impending doom. Needless to say, they did not. So why was this delay harmful? Because after being here for three years, having sampled a variety of professors and disciplines, I find myself in a good position to choose the courses I might most enjoy. Sadly, a substantial block of my schedule will be filled by these science classes instead.

So, if you like me suffer from labphobia and the thought of beakers makes you yearn for an intriguing novel, or a novel argument, here’s my advice: take your sciences early. Yes it is true that GE sciences fill quickly with seniors trying to complete half-forgotten requirements, but not every spot is taken. If science is not your thing, get it over with so that you can use your higher registration numbers later on to pick more enjoyable classes. I wish I had.

The Requirements: I understand, and mostly agree, with why we have a science requirement. A liberal education requires exposure to a broad range of disciplines and schools of thought. But it has always seemed to me (an admittedly uninformed observer of such things) that the scientific approach, which is to say the scientific method, is common to both the biological and physical sciences. The GE science classes require a time commitment well beyond a normal CMC class. When one considers the class time (2-3 hours/week) plus the lab time (1-3 hours/week) a science class seems to be closer to two regular CMC classes than one. The time commitment is significantly larger than those required by most other classes, but the class is not for 1.5 or 2 credits, and you have to take two of them.

So, in effect, CMC mandates four “units of academic time” be devoted to the sciences, more than the humanities (2 units) or the social sciences (3 units) or any other GE requirement. I wonder whether this use of time is most valuable. I suspect that requiring only one science plus lab would add just as much intellectual value to our liberal arts education as the two currently required. We do not require multiple introductions to any other discipline for non-majors, so why do we do so for the sciences?

I think it is fair to question this burden. It seems to me it would better to allows students to spend at least part of that time pursing a depth of knowledge in their chosen area of study. A strong standard of GE requirements, which CMC requires, is admirable. By and large, it forces students out of their shells and exposes them to multiple disciplines before we get sent out into the world. But burdens for burden’s sake seems to ignore this goal. The objective has been accomplished, and yet another test remains.

I invite you, if you have made it this far in my ramble, to proffer a reason why CMC should have this requirement. I do not know the answer, but I think asking the question is worthwhile.

How to define this masculine character? I would point you to three areas: personality, education, and culture.

The Genius of Men: Claremont McKenna, 64 years on.

I will stipulate, before I am assaulted by every reflexive liberal within keystroke’s reach, that not all CMCers are the same. There are exceptions to every rule…you know how the rest of this reasoning goes. That being said, there is certainly a CMC-type. Assertive, competitive, type-A personality: CMCers get stuff done. There is a drive that exists in your average CMCer that one does not commonly encounter. It cannot be random chance that so many people who share these traits just so happen to have been admitted to a small liberal arts college such as our own. Rather, I suggest to you that CMC attracts a particular type of student, and that type is masculine.

Now, I would like to argue a few preemptive responses. It would be trite for me to try to say something about leadership, so I won’t. Furthermore I will inevitably be told that I have ignored the 45% or so of my fellow Stags and Stagthenas who are of the fairer sex. I disagree. The personality type I describe exists amongst men and women alike—but that personality is certainly masculine, and there’s nothing wrong with that.

To wit, the first CMC class to include women received their degrees from Claremont Men’s College, as the school was then called. After the name change, these newly minted female alumnae were offered the chance to have their diplomas reissued by Claremont McKenna College, and they almost uniformly said no. These women were proud to have toughed it out with ‘the boys,’ an attitude that embodies the combination of bravado and sense of honor that exemplifies the best of the CMC masculine tradition.

We are a school based overwhelmingly on government and economics. Notwithstanding fantastic professors in many other departments–from whom I have had the great fortune to learn what little I can—the school’s history lives on in its current culture. When CMC began it offered only one major: political economy. I would suggest that the legacy of that mindset lives today, and that such a mindset is clearly masculine. A focus on business and the employment of power, on finance and the law; these are the historic dominions of male domination—an undeniably manly tradition which we follow through this day.

“Work hard, play hard” – an unofficial slogan of CMC. CMC’s culture more often than not resembles a scene from Mad Men (to be enlightened) or Animal House (to be unkind). Again there are exceptions to this rule too, but those who have experienced the spirit of most student functions would have to agree that no matter the forum, there’s an element of rowdy boyhood whenever CMCers gather to blow off a little steam. I neither endorse such a practice nor do I abhor it, but I believe it to exist.

Through its personality, education, and culture CMC embodies a male ethic, just as Scripps so clearly embodies a female form. It is a truly wonderful happenstance that such divergent and yet complimentary schools can coexist in such proximity. So raise a glass to CMC, and get in touch with your inner man.