|
Alumnus shares lessons on leadership
By Tom Cronin
When Donovan Pepper served as
president of the student body at what is now UIS in the early
‘90s, Student Government Association, The Journal and the
university itself all went by different names. There was no
Capital Scholars Program, and University Hall and Lincoln
Residence Hall were not yet in existence.
One thing that Pepper said has
remained constant at the university over the last decade is the
multitude of leadership opportunities available to students.
Pepper, the director of public
affairs for the Chicago-based Illinois Restaurant Association,
delivered his remarks Thursday at the Homecoming UIS
Student-Alumni Leadership Luncheon. He earned two degrees in
political studies during his time on campus – a B.A. from what
was then Sangamon State University in 1994 and an M.A. in 1996.
In addition to participating in
the university’s Model Illinois Government program, Pepper was
both vice president and president of Student Senate, the
precursor to SGA. According to Pepper, it was easy to talk about
his experiences in student government because he had recently
found some old issues of the student newspaper, which was then
called the SSU News.
“I will be honest,” Pepper said.
“I came down here to study. I wasn’t into getting involved and
doing all the extracurricular activities, but when I was asked
to be vice president, I certainly looked at the opportunity, and
I ran, never thinking that I would have to be the president.”
While Pepper was serving as vice
president, the president resigned because of what Pepper said
was an “unfortunate incident.” Dean of Students Homer Butler,
who has since passed away, told Pepper that the university
needed him as president of Student Senate because it was a
“critical time” for the university as discussions were going on
about a possible merger, Pepper said.
After seeking the presidency and
winning the election, Pepper faced the challenge of representing
the SSU student body when the campus was divided on the issue of
merging with another institution. Pepper said that Naomi Lynn,
the SSU president who became the first UIS chancellor, did a
“phenomenal job” facilitating discussion during the process of
merging.
“I was very impressed and struck
by her leadership ability to be able to – in the face of all
that opposition – to still continue forward, to have the vision
to place this university as part of the U of I system and in the
role we currently have today,” Pepper said. “So, watching her, I
learned a lot about what leadership is all about and truly being
able to go forward in the face opposition.”
Pepper said that “true leaders”
are people who do not take it personally when others disagree
with them, and they’re people who understand that such
disagreements are professional in nature.
One “true leader” who Pepper had
the opportunity of interacting with in his classes at SSU was
the late Sen. Vince Demuzio, who died on April 27. Demuzio
received a B.A. in education and human services from SSU in 1981
and an M.A. in education and public policy from UIS in 2002.
“He was a phenomenal man, and I
had the opportunity as a little student from Chicago to actually
have several classes with Sen. Demuzio,” Pepper said. “And I
learned a lot from him about what leadership is truly about and
being able to, if something is not going your way today, … step
back, regroup, try it again tomorrow, and see what happens.”
According to Pepper, UIS gives
its students the opportunity to become leaders and to find their
niche. Additionally, he said the classmates that students
interact with on a regular basis are likely to be people that
they will see in another five or 10 years.
“You never know who you’re going
to encounter,” Pepper said. “You never know how your past – and
the experiences you’ve had in the past – how they will take you
going forward.”
Lincoln
Legacy Lecture Series: Discussion on Civil Liberties
By Janee Mitchell
The Lincoln Legacy Lecture
series began with its first lecture, Civil Liberties in
Lincoln's Presidency, on Thursday Oct. 7. The lecture was given
by Mark E. Neely, Jr., a Pulitzer Prize-winning author and
Lincoln expert.
 Several
people came out to see the lecture series, many of whom were
extreme Lincoln fans. Chris Umhoefer, Lincoln fan, said he was
interested in discovering the new ways of looking at the Lincoln
administration and learn things he had not known before.
There were also those who were
eager to hear Neely's response to how the civil liberties of
Lincoln's presidency compared to the civil liberties present
today in Bush's presidency. Jack Navins, Lincoln fan, said he
was "most interested in correlation between major issues then
and issues now."
Neely started the lecture by
referring to an attack on New York City during the Civil War.
According to Neely, this was a poorly orchestrated and failed
attempt to burn down the city on the night of Nov. 25, 1864.
Neely said that Confederate agents from Canada were led by
escaped prisoners of war in the attack.
The attack on New York during
Lincoln's administration failed because of the lack of
technology, Neely said. As apart of their plot, the Confederate
agents would have had over 8,000 lives to destroy, aiming at
setting fires at night hangout spots and 13 hotels. However,
they closed the doors and the lack of air kept their fire from
spreading. Neely also said that the men had not been properly
trained in terrorism.
The attack on New York during
Lincoln's time is comparable to the attack on the World Trade
Center and the Pentagon during the (present) Bush
administration.
During the lecture, Neely said
that the attacks made during the Bush administration caused
people who write about civil liberties to reflect. In his
reflection, Neely said that he would make a closer assessment of
the proportionality of governmental power to the act of sedition
in terrorism, focus more on the end of the Lincoln
administration and Civil War, and pay more attention to the
judiciary.
Neely said that the policies of
the Lincoln administration were measured and in proportion to
the threats of terrorism. He also said that the administration
was attempting to dismantle the policies restricting the civil
liberties of others.
Neely said the judiciary was not
as fragile, nor a victim of executive measures as people would
think, in fact he said that it posed serious threats to the war
effort and law and order.
An example of the
administration's attempts at dismantling policies restricting
civil liberties can be seen in Lincoln's eager letters of intent
that were sent to the governor of Missouri. Neely made sure he
pointed out the differences in the two letters Lincoln sent. The
first letter, he said, can be seen as a letter of advice to the
governor in which he speaks of mutual support and Christian
charity.
Neely said that in his first
experience with the letter 15 years ago, he thought it was a
letter expressing the president's failure. Upon reevaluating,
however, he said the letter was a new policy initiative. The
second letter Lincoln sent was an enforcement of the first one
and Neely proclaims that it is a plan of strategy, not a
confession of failure.
When terrorists struck the World
Trade Center and the Pentagon, President Bush was in a class of
second graders in Sarasota, Florida. After the meeting with the
children, the president announced the attack that had been made
on the nation.
The president's action or
inaction, as some would say, has since been the center of many
rumors and the focus of a nation recovering from the shock of
the events. Despite numerous speeches from the president and
officials, there are still those with disbelief in his actions.
The terrorist attacks on Sept.
11th, 2001, have led to an attack on the Bush administration.
This is evident in Michael Moore's documentary, Bowling for
Columbine, in which he portrays the president as incompetent and
lazy.
This response to the president's
leadership is similar to the response Lincoln got from Gov.
Fletcher of Missouri, when trying to replace martial law with
civil law after the failed attack on New York City during his
time.
Neely refused to make a
comparison between the administrations, which is acceptable
because of the controversies it would initiate. Neely stated
that it is impossible to compare the civil liberties of the
Lincoln administration to that of the Bush administration
because now the nation is modernized.
He also said that there was a
lack of technology during the attack in Lincoln's
administration, and that there were no secret agents, all of
which are present today in Bush's administration.
Neely said that this information
alone is enough to notice the difference in times. Neely also
said the "factors are so different that it is pretty dangerous
to make comparisons, parallels and contrasts."
The lecture on civil liberties
concluded with a reception, where attendees received a chance to
meet the speaker. The Lincoln Legacy Lecture series continues on
Oct. 14 with Mark Summers speaking of politics and patronage,
and Oct. 21 with William L. Miller speaking of presidential
virtues. |
