The foundation of the Catholic Church has been rocked in the past few months by numerous allegations of priests who have abused children.

The sexual abuse by the priests is troubling, but more disturbing was the massive cover-up. Some Catholic clerics, fearing a hostile reaction from Rome and the public, seemed to have quietly brushed the accusations aside allowing those priests to abuse more children as they went from church to church.

Herein lies the danger of secrecy. When people keep quiet to protect themselves or the institutions they represent, corruption and scandal usually result.

Only on rare occasions is secrecy and hidden information used for the greater good of society.

For example, administrations should not give away nuclear secrets because they might harm the public good.

But, administrations should not engage in cover-ups of sexual affairs because that revelation would only harm the image and credibility of the perpetrator.

While the examples of secrecy and hidden information are less obvious at Penn State than the scandal in the Catholic Church, the cover-up of sexual affairs or the unethical accounting practices at Enron, several recent events have shown that some groups revel in operating secretly.

The first example was the closed-door discussions last year between Black Caucus and the administration after the Village takeover of the HUB-Robeson Center.

At the time, the Penn State student body didn't become fully aware of the controversial demands of Black Caucus, which included an upgrade to the African/African-American Studies Department, requiring the tenure of 10 full-time professors in the department by the start of next school year.

Another demand was that by the start of next school year, six mandatory credits of African-American/Third World studies be placed among the university's requirements for graduation. These changes to university policy deserved to be debated among the entire university, and unfortunately the entire process seemed to become dominated by special interest groups with their own vision of the ideal university. Not a fair process at all.

The second example is the closed-door meetings of the University Park Allocation Committee, which decides the groups and programs to be funded.

Why do these deliberations need to be behind closed doors?

Primarily because members of UPAC do not want to be held personally accountable for their decisions.

What would have happened this past year if the USG Senate had closed-door meetings?

I can guarantee that The Daily Collegian would have published several editorials demanding that the Conservative Coalition open the meetings to the general public.

How is it fair that the students don't have a right to know the reasons those individual UPAC members voted the way they did? Individuals who decide how to spend the millions of dollars of the student activity fee should be held accountable by the press and by the public.

The third example of secrecy and hidden information at Penn State is the secret societies.

There are three secret societies at Penn State: Lion's Paw, Skull and Bones and Parmi Nous. Of the three, Lion's Paw seems to be the most suspicious.

What is Lion's Paw? Well, no one really knows.

Unlike the other two secret societies at Penn State, Skull and Bones and Parmi Nous, Lion's Paw is not a student organization and not an official group at Penn State.

Yet, this group has an office on the 4th floor of Old Main.

Not many organizations have the clout to have an office in Old Main, so the student body has a right to know what kind of influence Lion's Paw has with the Penn State administration.

Without revealing its true intentions, Lion's Paw operates like the wealthy oil executive who gives millions of dollars to a presidential campaign and wants his donation to remain anonymous to the public.

People have a right to give money and time to political candidates who they feel support their values and interests.

The public, however, has a right to know who is giving money to candidates, so that it can serve as a check against a quid pro quo or political favors for the campaign contribution.

When Lion's Paw becomes active in campus politics, it is the right of the student body to know the agenda and goals of the organization.

So long as secret societies are private organizations with private interests, it should be of no concern to the student body the purposes of these organizations.

But, in the 2002 USG presidential election, many people thought to be in secret societies sported Rubina Javeri and Kris Ankarlo T-shirts on Election Day.

If many members of Black Caucus support a particular candidate, the public can assume that the candidate is favorable to the diversity issues that Black Caucus triumphs. I

f many members of College Republicans or Young Americans for Freedom support a particular candidate, the public can assume that the candidate has a conservative ideology.

Since many supposed members of secret societies were incredibly active in the recent USG election, the student body should know what the political agenda of the secret societies at Penn State are, especially since one of them is not a student organization and may not represent student concerns at all.

The press and public must now scrutinize the important Cabinet selections, which will be made by Javeri and Ankarlo in the next few weeks, to ensure that the secret societies, groups unrepresentative of the average Penn State student, do not have the loudest voices in the next USG.

Javeri and Ankarlo should recruit fresh faces to get some new blood and ideas into student government instead of the same politicians who occupy USG year after year.

Already it appears that a new coalition could form in senate comprised of Javeri and Ankarlo campaign workers. The press and public should ensure against another coalition forming in the executive branch.

Secrecy and hidden information are responsible for much of the corruption at Penn State and in the world. Groups at Penn State that are afraid of revealing their true intentions should not be trusted. Clearly UPAC and Lion's Paw have questions to answer. And when the executive branch is appointed, the student body will have a chance to see whether a quid pro quo existed for the faithful or whether the best people were picked for the job.

Since I am opposed to secrecy of pertinent information, I acknowledge that I was campaign manager for another USG ticket. The reader can now make up his or her own mind as to whether that position biases me. I know it did not as I would have the same frustrations with hidden information during the campaign if I was just an observer to the election. Yet, this is what it is all about- revealing all the facts so the public can decide.