STUDENT FEES
I read with interest in the February 22 Notebook that student fees (tuition, room, and board) for 1996-97 are going up $1,250, or 4.6 percent, to $28,325. In the same issue you published an article describing Princeton's efforts to increase its endowment, which as of July 1995 stood at nearly $3.9 billion. Given the size of the endowment, coupled with the university's current campaign to raise $750 million over five years, I question whether the fee hike is completely warranted.
I work at MIT and know that its fees are nearly identical with Princeton's and also Harvard's and Yale's. So much for competing on price. A ranking of endowments on a per-student basis for fiscal year 1994 shows that, among the major universities, Princeton's endowment, at $532,081 per student, is by far the highest (the comparable figure for Harvard is $344,627, and for Yale it is $327,244). These data also call into question the 4.6 percent fee hike.
Princeton has an unmatched opportunity to become the low-cost leader among top U.S. universities by holding the line on student fees. Basic economic theory says that when multiple resources (e.g. Ivy League universities) provide essentially the same product (e.g. a fine college education), the one with the lowest price gets the most business. If Princeton elected not to increase fees for one year, I calculate that it would cost $5.5 million in lost revenues, or just .14 percent of the total endowment. This loss could be offset by a reduction in the amount of financial aid offered students. Also, freezing student fees for one year would be a major plus for Princeton's marketing efforts. The result would be a win-win situation for Princeton and its students and a problem for Harvard and Yale.
Kenneth W. Saunders '82
ksaunders@ll.mit.edu
Acton, Mass.

I would like to second Jay Lehr '57's complaint against the trustees' self-congratulations over reducing the rate of increase for undergraduate tuition and fees (Letters, April 3). Princeton, with its vast resources and trustees blessed with intelligence and business acumen, should be able to find innovative ways to actually reduce tuition and fees. Otherwise, what hope can we have for our government achieving a balanced budget, the health industry holding the line on inflation, or the economy changing for the better? Those of us in the trenches have had to change how we work and live to be in tune with the times. It's time the university assumed a more responsible position in controlling inflation, or the well of alumni giving will run dry.
Paul Gwyn '57
Winston-Salem, N.C.

In your March 20 coverage of Alumni Day I was interested to read that the Moses Taylor Pyne Prize is still worth an amount equivalent to current tuition ($20,960). When I graduated 63 years ago, the Pyne Prize winner received $600. This probably demonstrates one or both of two things: the value of a Princeton education has increased, and/or the value of the dollar has decreased.
F. Tremaine Billings, Jr. '33
Nashville, Tenn.

Since the rate of increase for undergraduate fees has decreased for the fifth consecutive year, I guess that-applying the sort of reckoning favored by the Clinton administration and the Democrats in Congress-we are actually seeing a welcome "cut" in fees.
Max Maizels '72
Richmond, Va.

PETE CARRIL
Regarding the articles of March 20 and April 17 on the retirement of basketball coach Pete Carril, I say, Farewell to the greatest.
Coaches are remembered for winning the big ones; I think of Bill Roper's gridiron victory over Chicago in 1924, Charlie Caldwell '25's victory over Penn in 1946, and basketball coach Cappy Capon's defeat of Yale in 1950 (at center, he played 5-foot-10 George Sella '50 against 6-foot-6 all-America Tony Lavelli, whom Sella outjumped at the tipoff, then outscored, 18 to 10).
For Carril, winning the big one was the highest form of art. "We threw some junk at them" was his modest way of saying he out-thought the opposing coach. Carril had the mental capacity to make instant adjustments, personnel moves, and tempo changes. He operated with the ear of a conductor sensing hidden notes that his highly motivated players could play but not hear.
Medium-sized, hard-charging players from tough inner-city Catholic schools were the nuts and bolts of the Carril machine. Such student-athletes were not the favorites of an admission office that for most of Carril's 29 years as coach smugly skimmed the cream of the top high-school valedictorians. But these are the guys who will become the corporate leaders of tomorrow. Giving 100 percent and then reaching down for another 25 percent-that's what leadership is all about.
Pete, we loved watching your game, and we loved watching you slay Goliath, but in the final analysis what we admired most was the way your players learned first to respect you out of fear and at the end of their careers to love you out of achievement. Your coaching and teaching predate Dr. Spock. You brought out the best in your players. Only when they fully respected themselves could they admit their love for you. By then they were ready for the world, where success is only an affirmation of character.
Charles F. Huber II '51
New York, N.Y.

Inspiration like Carril's is the benchmark of many Princeton coaches. I particularly remember the inspirational leadership of Bill Roper, who in my sophomore year saved Princeton's honor system. When a classmate reported an honor violation by several members of the football team, we lost some star players. After the person reporting the offenses was blackballed by the eating clubs, Roper addressed a college-wide meeting that had been called to vote on whether to retain the honor system. I still remember his soul-stirring speech, in which he told us that anyone who would look with disfavor on a student who reported cheating would "spit at the feet of Nathan Hale." Loud cheers rocked Alexander Hall, and the honor system was saved.
Wallace Ruckert '30
Eastham, Mass.

CRIME & PUNISHMENT
I was appalled by William Rentschler's defamatory attack on John DiIulio (Letters, April 17). Rentschler's claim that Professor DiIulio's writings contain "racist" statements is contemptible, while his call for an investigation into DiIulio's "commitment to truth by an appropriate body of faculty overseers" is beneath contempt.
Rentschler's motives for attempting to smear DiIulio are transparent: DiIulio's research has exposed the intellectual and moral bankruptcy of much liberal criminology. Since Rentschler has little hope of refuting DiIulio's scholarship, he resorts to the basest sort of character assassination.
Perhaps the most outrageous of Rentschler's libels is his suggestion that DiIulio doesn't care what happens to "poor kids" and "minority youths." On the contrary, DiIulio's work is plainly motivated by a desire to save children of every race and socioeconomic condition from the moral poverty that places so many of our children at risk. As a realist, DiIulio knows that not every child will be saved; as a Christian he is dedicated to saving every child we can.
Scholars like DiIulio who fly in the face of political correctness expose themselves to what has rightly been called the new McCarthyism. DiIulio's willingness to bear this risk says all that any honest observer needs to know about his character and "commitment to truth." He is a shining example of Princeton in the nation's service.
Robert P. George
Associate Professor of Politics
Princeton, N.J.

I commend my classmate and friend Bill Rentschler for his rational and enlightened position on curbing crime. It seems obvious that we are locking up far too many of the wrong people, such as kids with no prior record caught with a small bag of marijuana; they take up prison cells that ought to be occupied by dangerous criminals. Building more and more prisons, as Rentschler states, is not the most desirable approach in a free society.
For the nondangerous, we should focus on far less costly drug treatment and prevention programs, as well as on alternative punishments less drastic and expensive than long-term confinement.
Gordon Barret Miller '49
Cincinnati, Ohio

Regarding Mr. Rentschler's letter and Professor DiIulio's reply in the May 8 paw: my concern is not the substance of their debate but its tone. Absent evidence, which he does not cite, Mr. Rentschler should not have described Professor DiIulio's writings as "neither scholarly nor consistently truthful," nor should he have recommended that the professor's "commitment to truth" be examined by "an appropriate body of faculty overseers," whoever they may be. Experts in the field can judge Professor DiIulio's writings; if he is mistaken about facts or their interpretation, they will say so.
The tone of Professor DiIulio's response is no better. His invective is just as steamy, and he goes too far in assaulting paw for publishing a letter critical of him. This, he says, "raises certain fundamental questions about its editorial standards and motivations." Is he suggesting that the editor is engaged in a conspiracy against him? This is as minatory and uncalled-for as Mr. Rentschler's suggestion about faculty overseers. One can only hope that President Shapiro, who has better things to do, will be spared requests to appoint committees to investigate Professor DiIulio's truthfulness and the editor's motivations.
Civility is in short supply in public life. Its absence helped persuade Senator Bill Bradley '65 not to seek reelection and former N.J. Governor Tom Kean '57 not to run for his seat. The way in which these two admirable alumni have conducted themselves in and out of office can serve as a model to us all, Professor DiIulio and Mr. Rentschler included.
Maurice Lee, Jr. '46
Cranbury, N.J.

By printing William Rentschler's letter and Professor DiIulio's response and by giving extended coverage to the debates over crime and the drug war, paw has set a standard of intellectual integrity some members of the faculty should adopt.
Peter D. Kinder '70
Cambridge, Mass.

Is paw to be an independent publication or simply another of the university's rah-rah publicity organs? I doubt the professor complains about the testimonials you published in his support in the May 8 and June 5 issues.
Jeffrey P. Gottlieb '89
Fort Polk, La.

I am grateful to William Rentschler for opening a debate on Professor John DiIulio's scholarship on criminal justice. Unlike the others who have written to paw on this matter, I graduated just a few years ago and took a class from Professor DiIulio. Now that I am working in DiIulio's realm, I have learned to associate his work with questionable presentations of data.
DiIulio always concedes one or two liberal points, but his ultimate message is rather simple: lock them all up, it's the only way to keep us safe. My concern is not so much the harshness of his message but the factual manipulations he uses to get there. Consider some of the claims DiIulio makes in paw's article about him (Notebook, March 6) and in his reply to Rentschler (Letters, May 8):
In his letter, DiIulio criticizes the justice system because, on any given day, three-quarters of the five million people under correctional supervision in this country are not in prison. This is technically true, but it begs the question: What kind of punishment should these people receive? DiIulio acts as if people not in prison are not being punished. That's not true. There are a variety of effective non-prison punishments such as halfway houses, electronic monitoring, intensive probation, mandatory employment and restitution, mandatory drug treatment, and other community-based sanctions.
Very few people commit the crimes-homicides, carjackings, rapes-that we learn about on the evening news. Most people are brought into the system for minor public-order offenses like trespassing or disorderly conduct, or non-DWI traffic offenses; many are drug addicts (not dealers) who are caught with small amounts of drugs for personal use, or who engage in prostitution or petit larceny to support their addictions. Almost all these people are suitable for intermediate sanctions.
DiIulio states that "over 90 percent of state prisoners have a history of violence or are recidivists." That makes it sound as if most prisoners need to be locked up, conjuring images of serial killers, rapists, and predatory career criminals. Yet a firsthand look at the data leads to different conclusions. DiIulio cobbles together extremely different statistical categories. There are big differences among murders, two-time shoplifters, and drug users who can't beat their addictions, but all are included in DiIulio's statistic: some for being violent, the others for being recidivists. Furthermore, the categories he combines are extremely broad. An occasional marijuana smoker and a pugnacious teenager both count as violent offenders. Indeed, the vast majority of violent offenders committed assaults, an extremely flexible crime category that includes everything from serious beatings to shouts between drunks in a bar. Two-thirds of "violent" crimes result in no injury whatsoever.
When such broad categories are added together, it is not surprising that virtually everybody in the system is included. It's like saying that over 90 percent of Americans are terminally ill or have been sick in the past five years. That claim is statistically true, but it paints a terribly misleading picture of American health.
It is also no accident that DiIulio focuses on state-prison populations. This sounds like a neutral measure, but it is actually a technical term that excludes the federal prison system, the county jail system, and the juvenile-corrections system. It also excludes admissions, a measure related to population which reflects the dynamic nature of the justice system better than a static one-day count. More comprehensive measurements reveal that about three-quarters of the people in the system committed nonviolent crimes, and many of the violent offenders committed assaults of low severity.
The article that provoked Rentschler's response demonstrates DiIulio's inflammatory rhetoric. In that article, he said that "crime is going to get worse" because a "tidal wave" of "superpredators" raised in "moral poverty" are coming to get us. His solution? "Get them at 18 and give them five-to-ten, no ifs, ands, or buts."
The factual nugget beneath this presentation is a demographic bulge of very young children who will be teenagers a decade from now-an age associated with high criminal activity. Reading DiIulio, one would never know that most children, even those raised in adverse circumstances, mature into productive citizens. And one would never know that the few who succumb to the increased problems of a hostile environment are capable of responding positively to compassionate, therapeutic interventions. DiIulio says he supports crime prevention through social programs, but his talk of superpredators does not evoke a compassionate response. People advocating for better schools, outreach to parents, and other support systems usually lose the budget battle to DiIulio's jail-builders.
Furthermore, the absolutism of "no ifs, ands, or buts" obscures the complexity of human experience. Most people who commit terrible crimes start with small crimes, but most people who commit small crimes do not go on to commit terrible ones. This is a familiar piece of logic, since most Princeton students went to high school but most high-school students do not go to Princeton. The question for criminologists is how to distinguish those who need to be locked away for years from those who don't. DiIulio's absolutism contributes nothing to the debate.
In his letter, DiIulio's analogy between violent crime and airplane accidents is revealing. He only wants to talk about the handful of flights that crash, while others want to talk about flight safety in general. Of course we should try to fix the problems that caused the crashes, but we should also recognize that it is generally safe to fly.
I am pleased to see a Princeton professor on the cutting edge of political discourse, but our university must take care to distinguish between a professor of politics and a practitioner of it.
Rebecca Ryan '94
Washington, D.C.

HOUSEPARTIES 1948
Your April 3 From the Archives asked how many "twinkle-toed tigers" could readers recognize in the photo of Tower Club's 1948 houseparties. I was a graduate student in architecture at the time, and I am the lucky guy in the right foreground dancing with the most beautiful gal on the floor.
You also asked if anyone was dancing "with that special woman who later said, 'I do'?" My answer is, yes and no. Toni Hopper was indeed that special woman who said "I do," but sooner rather than later (in 1948, we were already married). She was also probably the only gal dancing with two men at the same time that night, as she gave birth to our son, Mike, a few months later. Our daughter, Pam, then a two-year-old, was sleeping peacefully in our apartment at the Butler Tract. Pam subsequently gave birth to Amy Benton '93, who in 1992 helped preside over the Class of 1942's 50th reunion.
Bill Burwell '42 *49
Teaticket, Mass.

CAMPUS DRINKING
Reading Liz Vederman '93's February 21 On the Campus got me thinking again about the abuse of alcohol by students. When I was an undergraduate, a minority of us tried to address this problem as Student Peer Educators for Alcohol Responsibility, but few students seemed inclined to own up to this serious problem. Alcohol abuse was widespread then, and I am saddened but not at all surprised to read that it continues. The university must take much blame for this, having allowed the eating clubs to dominate the social scene so thoroughly. But ultimately the responsibility lies with the students, none of whom are forced to drink, or to make fools of themselves or commit sexual assault as a result. It's preposterous to think of excessive drinking as fun. There can be no fun in vomiting repeatedly, passing out, forgetting the previous night's festivities, having unprotected sex with strangers, or endangering one's life by reckless acts.
While heartened by Harmony Club and other alternatives to the Prospect Avenue scene, I worry whether things can truly change without substantial support from large numbers of students, alumni, faculty, and administrators. I challenge all Princetonians to think seriously about alcohol abuse on campus and what we can do, together and individually, to improve the quality of health and safety for present and future generations of students.
Andrea A. Vag '92
Asbury Park, N.J.

BIG-GAME HUNTING
I have just returned from five weeks in Antarctica and two weeks in Tanzania, where I was overwhelmed by an appreciation for geologic time and the evolution of life on our planet. I was also repulsed by man's role in whaling and sealing in Antarctica and in big-game hunting and poaching in Africa. It was, therefore, with a wave of sadness and nausea that I viewed the Class of '59's column in the April 3 paw with the photograph of Cap Beatie posing with a large antelope he had killed and his account of his exploits hunting big game in Botswana. His challenge to the class secretary "to test your level of political correctness" by publishing the picture rankled me. After seeing what little it takes to stalk and shoot these magnificent creatures, I am sickened by the persistent ardor for big-game hunting, especially in Africa, where regulations are in part allowing species devastated by hunting and poaching to repopulate. To see these creatures in their primordial struggle for food and reproduction is awe-inspiring, and man's ego to hunt them for no reason except to flaunt wealth and arrogance is disgusting. Mr. Beatie's picture and his boast of shooting a world-record lion, keedee, and tsessebe are distasteful, and we must question the editor's and class secretary's discretion in printing them.
Robert B. Schoene '68
Seattle, Wash.

I read Cap Beatie's challenge with wry amusement. His self-perceived heroism is evident, and he clearly feels smug in daring his class secretary to buck the social tide. I am sure that Mr. Beatie is thoroughly respectable, upstanding, and likable. I too have enjoyed the sobering thrill of firearms (my Navy Seabee weapon was the authoritative M-60 machine gun) and the thrill of hunting (mostly gray squirrels and whitetail deer). But in my advancing years I find myself less impressed by the mostly male fascination with, and emphasis on, command and domination. It is these latter traits that habitually lead us men to attach such pride to the handling of machinery (including firearms) and to the domination of others (for example, by slaying the biggest of anything). Reading my local paper, I notice that most sources of the world's tragedies stem from this emphasis. As fine a man as Mr. Beatie must be, I pray for a world where his values are deemed old-fashioned and dominate the world less, while the more typically feminine values of sharing and nurturing dominate it more.
Raphael (Rocky) Semmes '79
Alexandria, Va.

ARMY ROTC
I am writing to amplify and update the article on Army ROTC (Notebook, April 17).
ROTC scholarships are the lifeblood of the program. Their relatively high cost has been an item of continuing concern to Army budgetslashers. The argument has been made that at least two cadets could be trained and commissioned at a less expensive school for the same amount of money the Army pays to acquire a second lieutenant with a degree from Princeton.
In the past, the Princeton ROTC unit has survived the cost-cutter's ax for two major reasons. First, the professional quality of the Princeton commissionees has been extraordinary. In 1991 the Army recognized the excellence of the Princeton program by naming it the best of its size in the nation. Second, few Princeton cadets have dropped out of the program. Princeton's cadet retention rate of 90 percent compares most favorably with the national average of 69 percent.
The post-Cold War downsizing of the Army poses a significant threat to the Princeton ROTC program. The Army's Cadet Command, the organization that administers the nationwide ROTC program, is deactivating ROTC units at selected colleges and universities. As your article indicated, the Command has eliminated almost a hundred ROTC units to date, and 71 additional units are to be phased out over the next two years.
The Cadet Command determines the viability of units by evaluating their abilities to meet the annual commissioning goals it sets. A unit that fails to meet these goals is placed on probation. If no improvement in the recruiting and commissioning of cadets is shown during the probationary period, the unit becomes a candidate for elimination.
The Princeton ROTC unit commissioned 13 cadets in 1994 and 11 in 1995. Because these numbers fell short of the annual goal of 15, the Cadet Command placed the unit on probation in May 1995. Part of the problem is that a new Cadet Command scholarship policy inhibited efforts to revitalize Princeton's cadet recruiting. Effective with the 199596 academic year, a $12,000 cap was placed on all annual scholarships. The value of a scholarship to a prospective Princeton cadet, previously 80 percent of academic expenses, fell by more than 26 percent.
Recognizing the dramatic decrease in scholarship monies it was awarding, the Cadet Command urged expensive private institutions hosting ROTC units to supplement the new scholarships. The idea was to cover part or all of the academic costs left unpaid and to provide relief in the payment of room and board. Because of its policy of offering financial aid based exclusively on need, however, Princeton cannot offer financial incentives of this nature. Traditionally, the majority of Princeton ROTC scholarship winners have not qualified for financial aid, and in the current unit, only one meets the criteria.
The impact of the Cadet Command's $12,000 scholarship cap was immediate and predictable. Last September, just one freshman entered the Army ROTC program while seven enrolled in the Air Force ROTC program at Rutgers University, where Air Force scholarships cover 100 percent of the academic expenses of qualified cadets. Another prospective Army cadet opted to attend the University of Pennsylvania, where the Navy ROTC program offers scholarships similar to those provided by the Air Force.
Because the results of Army ROTC recruiting at other high-cost institutions were equally disappointing, the Cadet Command changed its scholarship policy. Beginning this fall, four- and threeyear scholarships worth $20,000 per year will be offered to qualified students who attend 25 selected colleges and universities. Princeton is one of these schools.
The challenge now is to attract more freshmen and sophomores to the ROTC program. Given the dire recruiting record for 199596, the results to date have been modest but encouraging: Six members of the incoming Class of 2000 and three members of the Class of 1999 have accepted $20,000 scholarships.
In March, the Cadet Command approved a second year of probation for the ROTC unit. Administrators are working with Lieutenant Colonel Bolzak and his ROTC cadre to devise ways to recruit more cadets. The success of this joint effort is the key to the future of the Army ROTC unit, which has been training Princetonians to serve the nation as civilian and military leaders since 1919.
George D. Eggers, Jr. '47 *65
Chairman, ROTC Advisory Council
Princeton, N.J.

TIGER BIKERS
Regarding the May 8 From the Archives photo of the Class of 1965 at its fifth reunion and your request for identification of the "mugs on motors": That's indeed Cosmo Iacavazzi on the right; Pete Riley is the guy in madras pants, and behind him is Wendell Cady. I'm the one on the left, with a handlebar moustache and sideburns, which in 1973 evolved into a beard. It has since turned white.
Mac Simpson '65
Honolulu, Hawaii
I found your two April 3 articles lauding Assistant Professor of English Tom Keenan's innovative approach to teaching highly ironic, given the university's decision this spring to deny him richly deserved tenure. He was one of a handful of professors dedicated to incorporating new technologies (both as tools and objects of analysis) into the classroom. Despite student interest in Professor Keenan's specialties-enrollment in one class jumped from 16 to 56 after it was announced he would teach it-Princeton has allowed him to slip through its fingers. His students are thankful for the intellectual opportunities he gave us.
Ashley Lindsay Salisbury '95
Cambridge, Mass.

TOM KEENAN
The freshman seminar taught by Professor Keenan concerns the media's impact on countries in crisis. I question how his background in English literature qualifies him to teach this subject. Or does it matter anymore what one professes or what authority one brings to the classroom, so long as the subject is politically correct and has a charismatic teacher?
William B. Hunter '37
Houston, Texas

CAREER CHANGES
Hard as it is for me to think of myself as middle-aged (I've always regarded middle age is a mutable concept: 15 years younger than your parents), I was gratified and interested to read of all my fellow Princetonians who have jettisoned careers and followed their hearts (paw, April 17).
My own meandering career path has resulted from always following my heart: I have been an actor, dairy farmer and milkman, sustainable-agriculture and food-microbusiness consultant, and now, candidate for Congress.
Some of us "children of the '60s" have never lost our idealism and dedication to making the world a better place. Changing careers when those instincts are no longer sufficiently nourished is the sanest thing we can do.
By being honest with yourself and receptive to change, you can turn what others might call a midlife crisis into a therapeutic and rewarding midlife correction.
W. Stephen James '74
wsjames@msn.com
Ancramdale, N.Y.

RUDE BEHAVIOR
As the wife of an alumnus, I participated in this year's P-rade, along with my husband and children. I noticed another alumnus rushing at young alumnae and giving them enthusiastic bear hugs and kisses. His actions may well have crossed the border between raucous fun and sexual harassment. Because this man was stoutly built and possibly inebriated, I was too intimidated to say anything to him. My husband was busy carrying our two-year-old, who was crying because this clown had knocked him over while rushing about.
What is to be done about such people? My husband suggests that, if you are a large man yourself and see someone behaving like this, you should hug and plaster him with kisses. Then he will know what it feels like.
Anne E. Barschall s'75
Tarrytown, N.Y.

FOR THE RECORD
The May 8 feature "Seasons," by Alan Lightman '70, had been published under a different title, but with a similar subtitle and the same art work by Karen Watson to illustrate it, in Technology Review, the alumni magazine of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, where Lightman teaches writing.
This is paw's last issue of the 1995-96 publishing year. We'll be back September 11. Have a great summer.
-The Editors