| OCR Text |
Show 4 OPINION Ute scholarship program a myth Wednesday, November 4,2009 www.dailyutahchronicle.com T here are plenty of people who have taken offense to the U's use of the Ute nickname through the years, both in and out of the American Indian community. I always took comfort because I was under the impression that part of the U's efforts to foster a good relationship with the Ute Nation was providing scholarships just for Ute tribe members. The only problem is that this "Ute scholarship program" doesn't really exist. When I decided to research the Ute tribe scholarship program's role at the U, I looked for it in different departments on the U's website... and looked and looked and looked, never finding a Ute scholarship program. It's not that there aren't scholarships at the U available to students from the Ute tribe, there just doesn't appear to be anything special or specific for them. The conflict arises from the fact that American Indians have a unique relationship with the United States government and consequently a unique relationship with governmentfunded schools such as the U. The Utes aren't just a tribe; they are considered a nation, not to be grouped with other ethnic minorities. When the NCAA began to restrict school mascots and nicknames in 2005, it created problematic situations at many schools with American Indian mascots or nicknames. For a time, it looked as if the U would be forced to exclude the Ute name from all team nicknames. From those conflicts, many programs began developing the relationship between schools and their American Indian tribal ties. Although the controversy about the mascots got most of the attention, the focus drifted away from scholarships. Many schools, including the U, were only allowed to keep their nicknames because the attached tribe appealed directly to the NCAA in their defense. JOSEPH SIMMONS I Junior, Mass Communication In return, the U agreed to change the school mascot from a Ute to Swoop. Whether or not the U agreed to provide scholarships, many people began to believe that there was a Ute tribe scholarship program. This caused a furor in 2006, when, according to a report in the Deseret News, the Ute tribe was left feeling disappointed by the U's lack of commitment to what they felt was a mutual desire to institute a Ute scholarship program. In the report, then-Ute tribe education director Marilyn Hetzel openly voiced concern that the U was just giving the tribe "lip service," and was not serious about establishing a real scholarship program. "I honestly don't feel like they're moving forward beyond saying they'd set aside a scholarship," Hetzel told reporters at the time. The Roger Leland Goudie Scholarship was briefly made available specifically to Ute tribe students coming to the U but is now available to several ethnic minorities. Cristina Caputo, a scholarship coordinator for the U's department of undergraduate studies in the Student Initiatives Office, said she has seen many American Indian students receive scholarships through the U's different departments, but there isn't a definite Ute tribe scholarship program in the way that it's perceived by many students. "In a sense, it's unclear what the university's relationship is with the Ute tribe in terms of working with PARKER TmOTHY/JheOafy scholarships," Caputo said. The good news is that even though the U doesn't seem to have a Ute tribe scholarship program, there are still scholarship options available to Ute students, as well as students from other tribes. Dale Tingey, the national director of American Indian Services, said he has seenfirsthandhow much good scholarship programs can do for all American Indian tribes. American Indian Services helps about 1,200 students get scholarships for higher education every year, but he said demand continues to increase. Last year, more than 1,800 American Indian students applied for scholarship aid, and that figure will likely increase. Depending on the school that the student chooses to attend, the scholarship programs through American Indian Services boast an 85 to 90 percent success rate, Tingey said. Still, these numbers are national. As local information wasn't immediately available, it's hard to say how well.this reflects the experience of members of the Ute tribe or other American Indians in Utah. The best thing that the U can do to avoid problems with the Ute tribe Utah Chronicle is to strengthen the tribe community, and that's done best through higher education. When considering the value of being able to be the Runnin' Utes, we need to remember that it's a part of our community both as a college and a state. The Ute tribe stood up for the U, and there should be a true effort from the U to set up a real and lasting Ute tribe scholarship program. Antonio Arce, director of education for the Ute Nation, was unable to prepare a statement before deadline. letters@chronicle.utah.edu Ban cell phones while drivinj Herbert unethical When lives are at stake, the phone call can wait in fundraising M T here are a lot of ways .to get $1 million: winning the lottery, working hard, or marrying a dying millionaire. Perhaps the easiest way JONATHAN , is to consign oneself to being DEESING a special interest group lackey in Utah. You might even get a governorship out of it. Senior, International Studies The last method was one employed by Gov. Gary Herbert last week, when he raised more will likely be a foregone concluthan $1 million in a single night of sion regardless of what hapfundraising, the largest in Utah's pens on Capitol Hill next year. gubernatorial history. He was able A million dollars in the bank is to do this in part by not following intimidating for Democrats in former Gov. Jon Huntsman Jr.'s Utah, where they are already tradition of not taking donations underdogs. As a result, we are of more than $10,000. Instead, Her- likely going to be blessed with bert accepted donations as large as limited options for governor next $50,000. Luckily for Herbert, Utah November, because any rightis one of onlyfivestates that does minded Democrat would not not place caps on campaign donawaste time and money running tions, a fact he has exploited to its in an election that was decided fullest extent. the day Herbert put an "R" next This is yet another show of Her- to his name. bert's main goal during the next Herbert has attempted to justify year: winning an election. his outrageous campaign funding Another obvious indication by saying it is ethical as long as of this was when he instructed he incorporates full disclosure of legislators not to pass any liquor donors and amounts. Still, 45 other legislation during this election states disagree. So does the Govyear that he would have to veto or ernor's Commission on Strengthsign. This means he is even unwill- ening Utah's Democracy, which ing to enact more restrictive liquor includes Jowers, who serves as its laws that generally please Utah's chairman. conservative majority. This is parNone, of this matters, however, ticularly telling of how insistent as Herbert has already shown his Herbert is on not upsetting any aversion to ethical politics when balance and thus his re-election he committed himself to opposing chances. a proposed citizens ethics initiaHis predecessor was committed tive two weeks ago. He presented to improving such laws and recog- dubious reasons for doing so, but nized the positive effect they could in all likelihood, he was simply tryhave on our state. Conversely, ing to maintain good relationships Herbert has taken a stance not of with lawmakers whose actions neutrality but of fearful limbo. would be called into question by Perhaps it is too early to judge this initiative. the governor's political accomI would like to have a goverplishments or future potential. nor who is more concerned with Kirk Jowers, director of the positive change than furthering Hinckley Institute of Politics, his own career, and maybe we said, "the time to really judge him have one. The upcoming legislawill be after the upcoming legisla- tive session will be a true test tive session." Herbert is facing an of his capabilities. But drawing $850 million deficit, Jowers said, from his most recent actions, as and he has an election coming up the election draws closer, Herquickly. bert will show his true colors, Unfortunately, with his most which might just be winning at recent efforts toward securing any cost. his governorship, the election letters@chronicle.utah.edu ost of us have welcomed cell phones as a necessity in our day-to-day lives, but Utah lawmakers are starting to question whether we've become too comfortable with our cell phones and the toll it's taking on road safety. Earlier this year, the Utah State Legislature banned text messaging while driving, but some officials are looking to take the law further by prohibiting the use of cell phones at all while driving. There are six states that prohibit drivers from talking on handheld phones while operating a motor vehicle. Rep. Phil Riesen is leading the legislation for the proposed bill to make Utah the seventh. But he wants to go even further by making Utah thefirststate to restrict drivers from using their hands-free devices on the road as welL There is a common misconception that driving while talking on a cell phone can be safe it if is done with a hands-free device. But the problem doesn't lie with the dangers of onehanded driving, it lies with the brain's multitasking limitations. Although many of us deem ourselves "masters of multitasking" (e.g. I can study for my chemistry exam while watching "The Office"), the brain isn't designed to successfully execute more than one task at a time, including driving. A 2003 study at the U described "inattention blindness," the phenom- KELLY O'NEIL Senior, Political Science enon in which motorists look directly at road conditions but don't really see them because they are distracted by a cell phone conversation. Motorists' inabilities to multitask with a cell phone were further examined in a 2006 U study that concluded "the impairments associated with using a cell phone while driving can be as profound as those associated with driving while drunk." "It might seem like an innocent act, but it takes lives, and I know firsthand that it can kill," said Linda Mulkey, founder of Hang Up - Save a Life, and mother of Lauren Mulkey, who was just 17 years old in 2007 when she was killed in an automobile accident by a driver who ran a red light while using his cell phone. Many politicians opposed to banning cell phones while driving argue that such a bill would warrant too much government control and do more harm than good. "In today's age, people are busier and working, they are conducting business from their home and run- ning from one meeting to another," said Rep. Carl Wimmer. "There are so many things that people use their cell phones for, and sometimes they need to make a quick call while driving." "Living in afreesociety means there are certainrisks,"Wimmer said. "The government has the ability to make people safefromalmost anything, but in order to do so, they would have to enslave the entire population and take away their liberty." If personal liberty is really more important than public safety, Why don't we allow drunken drivers to use the roadsfreelyand go unpunished? The answer is obvious—it's too dangerous. If studies have shown that drivers on their cell phones: are equally as dangerous as drunk drivers, what are we waiting for when it comes to regulating this deadly habit? "People know it's dangerous, but they still do it," Mulkey said. "But if the bill passes, people might say, 'Not only is it dangerous, but it's illegal.' It might not stop everyone, but it will stop some people." • Attention must be paid to-our personal driving habits and how they affect the safety of others: A law banning cell phone use while driving is not a matter of personal freedom, it is a matter of public safety. When lives are at stake, your phone call can wait. letters@chronicle.utah.edu LETTER TO THE EDITOR DeChristopher will be proven innocent by peers Editor: . I appreciated both Matt Plummer's recent column ("DeChristopher's 'necessary evil' still a crime," Nov. 2) and attached editorial cartoon by Willus Branham. I hope they caught your readership's attention. But, as with most things, "the devil is in the details." The headline, which I appreciate was written by someone other than Plummer or Branham, is misleading. No one has argued that what Tim did could be considered a crime. However, the beauty of our federal system is the function of the jury. That is, a jury of your peers, if you request a jury trial, decides your fate. Not just a judge, not the prosecutor, not the oil/gas lobby, but your peers. What we have argued on Tim's behalf is that a jury under our system of due process is entitled, indeed obligated, to determine whether what Tim did was justified in light of the scientific fact of climate change and the threat that our continued dependence on fossil fuel and the resulting CO2 represents to Tim personally and his generation.* The character drawings in the cartoon certainly - : represent key figures in nonviolent social change. Tim's actions represent the best of nonviolent social activism demanding necessary change without harming any person or property. Tim has never been worried about being accepted into any group, regardless of how distinguished they are. His motivating concern is how can he preserve the environment which he, you and all others are dependent upoa My own take on the cartoon is that the individuals represented there—Ghandi, Thoreau, Martin Luther King (and even Branham)—would be applauding Tim and welcoming him into the chamber of those individuals who have made the world a better place. I hope your readers will follow Tim and join in his support. Patrick A. Shea, Co-counsel for the defense of Tim DeChristopher |
