OCR Text |
Show DAILY THE UTAH C H R 0 I M E L C Tin" THE Leavitt Should Have Vetoed Tuition Bill Utah State Legislature The Gov. Mike Leavitt to make it harder to attend school in Utah. Amidst a year of budget slashing and tuition increases, their newest target is students. non-reside- nt sturequiring dents to complete 60 credit hours before gaining residency. The previous law made it possible to achieve residency in as little as 12 months that doubles the time out-of-sta- te requirement. Legislators claim that the bill will generate an extra $5 million for colleges and universities. But they fail to account for the probability that such stifling residency requirements will surely turn students Most Utah. from other states away still function under the 12 month policy, making them much more prospective out-of-sta- te financially attractive. While signing the bill, Leavitt attached a letter acknowledging that the bill has its problems. He suggested th3t the issue be in a special legislative session in May. If Leavitt docs not fully support this bill, why wasn't it vetoed? rOVM! ffl .77 , Administrators have already drawn the U's 2002-0- 3 budget and the figures account for that extra $5 million. Remember, that's $5 million that is by no means a guarantee. What about current who are working on gaining non-residen- Leavitt recently signed House Bill 331, , hb.cf Campos tvlo&TH Sooth S?s" of Compos CHRONICLE'S VIEW ts residency? HB331 contains no grace period for those students. If someone moved to Utah within the last year, they will almost surely have to wait at least another year to pay reasonable tuition. The bill will most likely cast a negative shadow on Utah and its higher education system. It sends a students message that are not as welcome. Such an impression will likely eliminate those extra funds the bill was expected to raise, further negating its existence. So far, response to the HB331 has Utah has been nearly about 12,000 students, many of whom will be directly affected by the bill. But only a handful of them have spoken up against it If you agree that HB331 is unfairly targeted toward students, contact your legislator, Leavitt, or U student body president Ben Lowe today. out-of-sta- non-existe- non-reside- te H Tlii - LETTER nt nt Editor TO THE in inVSt" """ '"MumS EDITOR writing or drama class? After the various school massacres throughout the nation, why would we want to allow guns on campus. I realize that the permit allows you to carry concealed weapons by law, but I'm sure most people would agree that it is quite inappropriate to be toting such a weapon if the are attending school. If this ban is lifted, it will definitely affect the students here. However, Attorney General Mark Shurtleff and Sen. Michael Waddoups, Lake, don't have to come to the U everyday, so what do they care? They just want to make sure their precious little guns can go wherever they please. I applaud the U's stance and their lawsuit to try and keep the ban on the books. I was appalled to read the March 13 news article "U Files Suit in Support of n Policy," about lawmakers wantilift the U's campus. on the ban to on ng guns As a student here, and a person who has even considered obtaining a concealed weapon permit, I feel better knowing that guns are not allowed on campus. If I did indeed hold such a permit, I would still not bring ' r a gun on campus because it is not necessary. I remember watching on "The Dairy Show" a piece on Salt Lake right before the Olympic Games, and they basicalhicks. I was a ly characterized Utahns as being bit offended, but still laughed about it I am not laughing now, as I see that maybe that is closer to the truth than we think. Why in the hell would anyone need to bring a pistol to No-Gu- gun-toti- Unsigned editorials reflect the majority opinion of The Daily Utah Chronicle Editorial toard. Editorial columns and letters to the editor are strictly the opinions of the author. The forum created on the Opinion Page Is one based en vigorous debate, while at the same time demanding tolerance and respect Material defamatory to an individual or group because of race, ethnic background, gender, appearance or seiual orientation will be edited or will not be published. tMmmimmmnttmJm Keep U's Gun Policy nt non-reside- iiiiiii m R-S- ng STEPHANIE MCFEELY Junior, Social and Behavioral Science unaer Solution Is About Help Not Handouts CRIS BROCKWAY s Beware y Chronicle Opinion Columnist the wolf in sheep's clothing. has given us such a multitude of solutions, such a plethora of modern "conveniences," that many sec it as a "magic bul-Flet " 7-People believe in technology, and iust- ly so, because of T wt ble in our lives: the automobile, modern medicine, all the way down to the modest blender. They all solved perceived problems and apparently made life better for their recipients. What is easy to ignore in their blinding light is the problems that they cause and must then, in turn, be solved again. From smog to narrow-minde- d medical practices to the burden of excessive appliances, nothing comes without a price. In the case of genetically modified food, this price may be the highest we have known. Most everyone has heard the classical contentions against genetically modified food: It is unnatural, unpredictable, has lacked sufficient testing and it killed Monarch butterflies that munched on some of its modified goodness. One study indicated that over half of U.S. produce. including 80 percent of corn, is genetically modified, unbeknownst to most people because modified food doesn't have to be labeled as such. In Europe there is a perpetual uproar over modified foods; protests abound, and some groups go as far as to level genetically modified fields. Why so much concern, Europe? Haven't you been listening to the proud companies that manufacture these goods? All the problems will be worked out eventually, and besides, their true goal is to produce superior plants that can feed the world's population what better? So what if they stand to make a ton of money? Obviously, theirs is a truly altruistic venture, where any pecuniary rewards are simply secondary. The appeal of ending world hunger is truly intoxicating, and for good reason: Many of us have simple dreams from a young age of ending world hunger. These carry over to our adolescent and adult years, when we quip about daunting tasks, "O.K. And right after that I'll end world hunger." Now that there are companies prepared to shoot the magic bullet into the heart of hunger, people arc jumping on the bandwagon. It's hard to avoid that appeal. Now, for a change, let's depart from our usual path and examine up front the potential problems of continually feeding the world's starving populations. One great problem is revealed by a relationship that is almost as simple as coming from the laws of ecology. It is the simple fact that the more food a population has, the more that population will grow. All animals, and yes that means humans, are at the mercy of this law. It is the explanation for a burgeoning deer action-reactio- n, population in the summer (when food is plentiful), followed by many deaths from starvation in the winter (when food is scarce). This law is why we cannot give in to our craving to simply feed the hungry in starving countries. We must find a better, albeit a more complex, solution. This will require us to provide real help in the form of teaching them about new farming technologies among other things rather than a hand out. This stance is not without its drawbacks, and seems, at first glance, selfish and Indeed, it will truly grate against every altruistic bone in your body. Until you consider the deeper truth behind it, that producing more food can never, ever solve world hunger by itself. When you feed a starving population, they increase in size as more survive and reproduce, and within years they have outstripped the food supply. They starve again. Feed them again, more this time, and they naturally grow, outstripping the newer, bigger food supply. As this continues, indefinitely, how helpful have we become? Their hungcr leaves them every once in a while, but for the majority of the time they are mired in a perpetual famine, one that worsens every time their population increases. At this point, can we really be so audacious as to claim that we are helping them? We are simply throwing fuel on their fire of famine, and then turning our backs and feeling good as they begin to burn anew. One would think that companies who manufacture genetically modified foods would consider this. Indeed, they probably know it well they have discovered a cash cow, a simple-minde- d. CHRONICLE OPINION EDITOR LAURA B. WEISS LWEISSCHRONICLE.UTAH.EDU market that grows with the more you put into it! As farmers in large agricultural nations use more superior genetically modified seeds, they get bigger and bigger bumper crops, which have to go somewhere. These get sold to aid organizations or perhaps directly to starving nations, whose populations then grow, and thus need to buy more next year. And the chain begins again, all starting with a genetically modified food company. Beware the wolf in sheep's clothing. Is there a better way? Of course there is, but as is the nature of the better way, it is harder. It requires aid organizations to not just heap food upon the starving, but to educate them in methods of birth control and then provide those methods (doubly good, as this may help slow AIDS). It requires genetically modified food companies to produce crops that can be grown by the starving citizens of the countries themselves, perhaps of the drought-resistavariety, so that they can find their own equilibrium of food and people. It will require training the people of these countries to use the new crops. It will require testing the crops in those places to make sure they do not upset their ecosystems. It requires shrinking the profit margin, so it is obvious why genetically modified food companies opt for the other direction, for the simple solution, and perhaps in their heart of hearts hope that it will really work. Ultimately, this is a hopeless hope, as dictated by the laws of ecology. Cris welcomes feedback at: cbrockwaychron-icle.utah.ed- u or send letters to the editor to: nt 581-704- 1 |