OCR Text |
Show 5 Wednesday, March 5,2008 OPINION www.dailyutahchronicle.com LETTERS TO THE EDITOR * a a KealtKy th^ witoh PHILLIP CAHHQN/Iht Deity Utah Ow /1 THE CHRONICLE'S VIEW No| ^ilcjiigh time on pur hands Student elections need to break away from unnecessary rules S $&•; ."• ; ^;. even percent is an estimate of how many students at the U vote at the Associated Students of the University of Utah elections. Of course, that number fluctuates a few points on a yearly basis, but it's a fairly low number considering the number of students who attend the U. Although there might be a variety of reasons for the campus-wide shunning of ASUU elections, we see one reason that ASUU has the ability to remedy, and that is its insatiable desire to mother the entire election process. -*• Granted, there must be rules and people who ensure that those rules are adhered to, but it must be said that ASUU elections have experienced a silly rule epidemic. It almost comes across as people, in the office not having enough to do and misdirecting their need for control onto candidates trying to do a job. •.... If a website goes up one minute too ••'• soon, the party responsible can be fined. No one is allowed to campaign until a . certain date, and even then, it is within 1 restricted hours. The list of too nit-picky rules can go on, but why? Why notjust let people campaign how and when they want? Realistically, elections are a popularity contest in their current state, and the system we have perpetuates that. Candidates are given a small pocket of time in which they are supposed to reach the entire student body, but it is impossible for them to do. By default, the party with the most friends wins, as op- ';-, \ posed to the party that reaches everyone based on their platform and message. Time regulations need to go. Candidates need to be able to be out on the sidewalks of campus reaching the average student, : rather than relying on the popularity of their party members to carry them into ,a position that affects the entire studerrt )l body." "•.':"•""".":; " 7 V ' • ' • - ' "••'• '••.'"•'-*>. '/editorials reflect the majority opinion of The pafly Utah Chronicle Editorial Board. Sighed editorials," edif6rfal : columns and lettcVsto^ ~ i ' c the editor are strictly the opinions of the author. The forum created on the Opinion Page is one based on vigorous debate, while at the same time demanding tolerance and respect. Material defamatory to an individual or group because of race, ethnic background, religion, creed, gender, appearance or sexual orientation will be edited or will not be published. All letters to the editor will now be published online at www.daily utahchronicle.com. Letters that the editor deems best represent those received will be printed in the newspaper... .•• .-^/?. . •••••>,;•;' •:-1:- ••••• .•>..'-[ -,V- Senate Bill 113 places us on a very slippery slope Animal rights groups' protests are resulting in a loss of transparency in government affairs A s soon as Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr. signs Senate Bill . 113 into law, the personal information of Utah educational institutions' medical or scientific ANASTASA researchers will be protect- NlEDRICH ed and almost totally unavail_ able to the "" public through the Government Records Access and Management Act or other legal requests. This-means that if animal rights groups or aayone else wants to find out the names, home addresses or other identifying information of the U's researchers, they won't be able to get the information by requesting it from the university, which will not be legally bound to provide the information. Currently, animal rights group members or any other members of the public can request this type of information from the university through GRAMA. That doesn't mean they will get it, but as things are now, they can still legally request it. Once it becomes law, SB 113 will put the private information of state institutions' researchers into a category that will exempt it from ' GRAMA requests, meaning that the public won't even be able to legally request this type of information anymore. The organization Utah Primate Freedom and others have stated "A L that they are concerned about this type of change in the law for several reasons. One of which b that it might lead to a slippery slope of secrecy information and a loss of transparency in government affairs. • Sen. Greg Bell, R-Fruit. Heights, has stated that he sponsored SB 113 to respond to animal rights protesters from Utah Primate Freedom and other organizations who had been harassing U researchers on campus and at their homes. I find it unfortunate that Sen. Bell and the university found the legislation necessary in the first place. I am a proponent of complete transparency in government in all instances possible, and the actions of a few have cost governmental transparency for many. I would call myself a reasonable animal rights activist. I care deeply for animals and keep their concerns in the forefront of my mind every day. I don't eat meat or wear clothing or use products made of animals or that is tested on animals. Although I would do almost anything to protect animals from harm, I would not break the law or harm others or their property. I act legally to advance animals' rights. I beJUeve doing so is more effective than breaking the law to try to achieve the same aim. I take issue with activists for researchers' homes. The former any cause that break the law or respects the practices of others, harm others or their property to their privacy and their families' try to affect the change they want safety, even when we might disto see happen. It's one thing to agree with them. The latter does stand outside an abortion clinic not. or the U while non-violently, Actions by radicals in any verbally protesting abortion or group usually have the result of animal testing. It's another thing giving the whole group a bad to bomb an abortion clinic or name. For the sake of the rest of threaten an animal researcher. us peaceful vegans, vegetarians and animal activists, I hope that There is a time and place for this change in the law will proeverything, and the approprivide a sort of incentive for other ate place for protesting the U's animal lovers to protest approprianimal testing research is at the ately and in a way that is respectU, not researchers' homes. ful to others. Although I absolutely detest and oppose animal vivisection To any and all protestors out (operation or experimentation on there: say what you want to say a living organism, _____ _ and be heard, including but not but do so while limited to surgery others' I am a proponent of respecting without anesright to privacy. I thesia) as Utah am sure we all do Primate Freedom complete transparency things that at least and other animal one other perin government in all rights organizason would want tions do, I do not to protest. Let's instances possible, and believe that proremember that testing researchthe actions of few have and treat others ers' practices outrespectfully, as we cost governmental side their homes would want to be is acceptable. transparency for many. treated, even by There is a fine _ those who comline between . " pletely oppose protesting and hawho we are, what rassment. It is possible to protest we do or what we believe. something you absolutely detest Set the example. Don't perpetuwhile still respecting others' ate the negative stereotype. If we choices to act in total opposition all act with respect for others' to your beliefs. It would likely views and the rule of law, we can be equally or more effective to maintain governmental transparnon-violently protest vivisecency, others' rights or benefits tion outside of the U laboratories that we hold dear. as it would to protest outside letters@chronicle.utah.edu Calling the kettle black Editor: At some point, emotion must be tempered by reason. "Calling the kettle black," "blackmail" and "Black Friday" are not racist terms, and when a fellow points to his 1969 Camaro and says, "That's my baby," he is not referring to a human. Of course Sen. Buttars' statement, made recently during Senate proceedings, was likewise merely a figure of speech. Of course it was a metaphor and not an analogy, nor a simile. Of course Buttars did not mean to denote, nor denigrate, an actual, human baby of color. It was an unfortunate case of inadvertently mixed metaphors— that is all. Although the result was clearly problematic, it also was unintended, innocent and entirely devoid of racism and "hate." To steadfastly deny this even as a possibility is not reasonable. In fact, it is intellectually dishonest. By the way: to you longtime political detractors of Sen. Buttars who are seeking to exploit this recent incident in an effort to oust him from office, be aware that in making hateful comments about him—such as that made recently by Araveni Olivares ("Students and U staff blast Buttars," Rochelle McConkie, Feb. 25) who accused Buttars of being "black, dark and ugly...under (his) skeleton"—you, yourselves, become guilty of hypocrisy...of "calling the kettle black." Mark Terran Salt Lake City, Utah They must be exposed Editor: I am wondering if The Chronicle is willing to look into Utah's two superdelegate voters, Langen and Hale. I was shocked to discover that two superdelegates can subvert the will of the democratic process. Barack Obama won the majority here in Utah. Unfortunately, two public servants can ignore voters and give their votes to Hillary Clinton. Please provide students with contact information for these two individuals and do a story. I think it's very important, especially this election, that voters let their public officials know who they work for and who they are supposed to speak for. We vote for Barack, so they slap the majority in the face and turn their backs to vote for Hillary? This is sick. Superdelegates are undemocratic. If we're going to have them, they should go the way of the districts they represent. Michael Whitaker Sophomore, Mathematics Pappas may need friends Editor: Nick Pappas1 column on his "friend" Chris Buttars ("My good old friend Chris: Buttars' love is give and take," Feb. 21) is a pitiful attempt to inform readers using pathetic hyperboles and annoying satire. The space used in The Chronicle would have had a stronger impact if the article had addressed the facts of Buttars' past offenses rather than a meaningless story of a "friendship." The article raises more questions about Pappas' character than are answered about Buttars. Pappas adds a tone of disrespect rather than posing poignant questions on how this representative of the • people is allowed to make discriminating remarks and still hold a seat in office. If the intent of the article was to persuade people on the character of Buttars, it has failed. In fact, it was so poorly written, our writing class spent an hour discussing Pappas1 failed attempt to reach a conclusive purpose. If Pappas intends on a writing career, Jie would be better off staying away from sour humor and invalid information. Maybe Pappas was just desperate for a friend! Megan Deming Jessica Durham Patrick Colvin Ross Quigley |