| OCR Text |
Show Views&Opinion Monday, Oct. 5, 2009 Page 10 Utah State University • Logan, Utah • www.aggietownsquare.com OurView AboutUs Editor in Chief Patrick Oden Thanks to those who help pay for our education News Editor Rachel A. Christensen Assistant News Editor Catherine Meidell I t’s no secret that rising tuition costs feel heavy in the pockets of students. It’s a common gripe that tuition is becoming too much of a burden to handle. The thing students need to realize is the cost of tuition is tiny in the grand scheme of the cost of education. Tonya Davis, Student Giving adviser, said USU students only pay for 13 percent of their college education through tuition. The news is familiar with 13 percent. Only 13 percent of all TV households watched Obama’s hour-long speech about health care in September, according to The Atlantic. By closing Utah state offices on Fridays, creating a four-day work-week program, those buildings use 13 percent less energy, according to The Associate Press. Only 13 percent of contributors to Wikipedia are women, according to The Wall Street Journal. In the broad scope of things, 13 percent really isn’t a high figure. So yes, tuition costs are rising and it’s painful for a college student’s wallet. However, consider the fact that there’s still 87 percent of the cost that isn’t paid by tuition. Imagine having that cost tacked onto tuition. Hallelujah for private donors and state-higher-education money, which takes care of that 87 percent. According to the Campaign for Utah State University’s Web site, thousands of students receive “an extraordinary education” at USU, and “many of these students can attribute a part of their success to the generosity of individuals who believed in the power of education. “We look to our dedicated friends and future supporters to join with us in assuring access and opportunity to future generations of students,” it states. The USU campaign looks for about $400 million in private donations, the Web site states. Each USU college, distance campus and program looks for donors “in order to attract gifts dedicated to undergraduate scholarship support, graduate fellowship support, faculty support, program support, facility enhancement and unrestricted funds,” it states. Scholarships. Fellowship support. Faculty. Better facilities. Utah State University sure has a lot of reasons to give thanks to outside donors. Unfortunately, it is unrealistic to think students could personally thank each person who makes a donation. Students can, however, participate in Tuition Freedom Day this week to give their thanks. During the Thank-a-Thon Tuesday and Wednesday, 10 a.m. to 3 p.m. in the TSC, students can write thank-you notes to donors. Show your gratitude, Utah State. Get involved and write a thank-you note to those donors whose contributions make your education at USU a possibility. Senate climate bill A fter months of meetings, Sens. John Kerry, D-Mass., and Barbara Boxer, D-Calif., released their long-awaited climate bill with great fanfare. But missing from the 800-page Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act is a cap-and-trade system. That’s disappointing, since Boxer announced earlier this year that the Environment and Public Works Committee would start from scratch on devising a system of capping greenhouse gas emissions and issuing a declining number of pollution allowances to covered industries. Instead, she and Kerry released a bill that is being called a starting point. There are a number of pollution-reduction measures in the Kerry-Boxer bill, but the hallmark of the Clean Energy Jobs and American Power Act is that it has a stronger cap on greenhouse gas emissions than the Waxman-Markey bill that the House passed this spring. By 2020, there must be a 20 percent reduction below 2005 levels. The House measure calls for a 17 percent reduction over the same period. Unlike Waxman-Markey, the Senate legislation maintains the Environmental Protection Agency’s authority over issuing permits to coal-fired power plants. There are programs for retraining and assistance for those who want to work in the emerging clean-energy economy. The bill also mandates a report on the efforts made by other major emitting nations, such as China and India, to reduce their pollution. But in addressing global warming, the hard part is the cap-andtrade system. Kerry told us Wednesday that work on that is being left to the Senate Finance Committee, which, of course, is slogging through hundreds of amendments on health insurance reform. Because this pollution-reduction regime would fundamentally change the U.S. economy, the debate will pit politicians, regions and industries against one another in a fight for self-preservation. As we saw with Waxman-Markey, it will neither be pretty nor go quickly. Despite the obvious calendar crunch, Kerry, who is also on the Finance Committee, is confident that a cap-and-trade bill could be voted on in time for the Kyoto II climate negotiations in Copenhagen in December. We’re not nearly so sure. This column first appeared in the Oct. 1 edition of The Washington Post Features Editor Courtnie Packer Assistant Features Editor Greg Boyles Sports Editor Tim Olsen Assistant Sports Editor Graham Terry Copy Editor Mark Vuong Photo Editors Pete Smithsuth Tyler Larson Unenlightened I f a philosophy department is eliminated from a college and no one raises a voice in protest, did it ever actually exist? There have been many departments and majors that have suffered a cruel fate under the alleged budget crisis that Utah State University is supposedly suffering through. We all know at least one professor who has been asked to retire early. We all look at Banner and find the choices for classes Re-Entry Thoughts noticeably thinner than they were a year ago. The philosophy department may not be as bad off as other majors or departments. However, no subject on a college campus is so embedded in the tradition of a university education as is philosophy. From ancient Greece to the first modern university in Bologna, Italy, philosophy has been the cornerstone for a university education. Arguing logic, epistemology and rhetoric was considered essential for an elite mind. And while USU most likely has no plans to eliminate this from the curriculum, it certainly does not seem to care that the lack of philosophy available to students denies them an essential part of the traditional college experience. At the start of this semester, only three philosophy professors are teaching classes at USU. Two of them are tenured. The third tenured professor is on sabbatical. Given the size of USU, that is meager. Most schools of our size and stature easily reach double digits in tenured professors. What makes this more embarrassing is that a look at BYU’s philosophy Web site reveals 10 fulltime professors, six part-time professors and seven professors emeritus. This is a school whose standing creed is, “When the Prophet speaks, the debate ends.” Yet, they are fully staffed in a subject they really do not want their students to actively engage in. Lunacy. Please, do not think that my lament about the quantity of philosophy professors and classes at USU is an indictment of the quality we are fortunate to have in Logan. The two tenured professors teaching this semester are incredible men who I strongly recommend my fellow Aggies seek when making a schedule. Charlie Huenemann is the Zen Humanist whose classes are more like 20 people sitting around a campfire. The greatest thing about being in Huenemann’s class Unconventional Wisdom P is that no philosophical subject is too mundane or horribly confusing that his sly humor can’t deconstruct it into layman’s terms. If you do not find Huenemann’s classes fun and involving, my suggestion to you is to consider trade school. And then there is Richard Sherlock, a man whose quirky brilliance needs to be seen in full-living color and three dimensions to be fully appreciated. Personally, I do not fear God. What I do fear is explaining to professor Sherlock why I do not fear God. If you go into Sherlock’s class with half an argument, you leave it with half your pride. His grasp of philosophical principles and the speed in which he lays out the discussions has made me nickname his classes “The Fastest Fifty Minutes in Utah.” One of the main arguments against philosophy’s relevance to a university education is philosophy majors themselves. The standing stereotype suggests that philosophy majors are unshaven atheists who look like Comic Book Guy from “The Simpsons” and generally sneer at everyone around them. Yeah, OK, that is for the most part true. But, you have to admit, Comic Book Guy is one of the funniest characters in the show. You wouldn’t kill him off for being irrelevant – so why eliminate philosophy? The detractors will tell me this university is broke. That the money simply is not there to fund much of anything, no less philosophy. Well, consider this short list of things the university wastes money on: free ice cream, over watering the lawns, guest speakers who perpetuate the myth of man-made global warming, this column and a 20-win bonus incentive to a basketball coach, whose nonconference schedule is filled with teams who would struggle to take seventh place at the Special Olympics. The president of this university, the provost and the dean of HASS might help their George W. Bush-esque popularity if they started concentrating on providing more classes to students, regardless of their proclamations of financial woe. Philosophy is not an element of a university education, it is a fundamental part of it. Fund it. Harry Caines is a senior re-entry student from Philadelphia majoring in interdisciplinary studies. Unconventional Wisdom will appear every Monday. Comments can be made at www.aggietownsquare.com or sent to chiefsalsa@yahoo. U.S. in need of shield law resident Obama has long said that he supports a law protecting the relationship between journalists and their sources. But his administration’s latest proposal hardly reflects that. The language it has given the Senate Judiciary Committee belies the president’s stated support for having judges balance the public interest in news gathering against the need to compel disclosure of a journalist’s sources. The House passed its version of the federal shield bill in March with bipartisan support and that of media organizations, including The Washington Post Co. In that measure, a journalist would be compelled to reveal a confidential source only under specified conditions, such as if disclosure is needed to prevent death, bodily harm or a terrorist act. Disclosure would also be required when investigators sought to identify a person who leaked properly classified information in a manner that caused “significant and articulable” harm to national security. But in all cases, those seeking to compel disclosure would have to exhaust all reasonable alternative sources of information and demonstrate that the public interest in disclosing the source outweighed the public interest in thorough news coverage. By contrast, the administration’s proposal would require courts in criminal cases to order disclosure of confidential sources as long as the government makes a reasonable claim that the information is essential, that it has exhausted reasonable alternatives and that it complies with internal guidelines for subpoenaing journalists. The reporter must show by “clear and convincing evidence” that there are “extraordinary circumstances” for protecting the identity of a source — a virtually insurmountable burden. The proposal also strips the court of any opportunity to consider the public interest in reporting on national security matters. The administration insists that its language is not final. Indeed, negotiations between the White House and the Senate Judiciary Committee are continuing. We urge them to keep talking and come up with a bill that is acceptable to all sides. This column first appeared in the Oct. 4 edition of The Washington Post Web Editor Karlie Brand About letters • Letters should be limited to 400 words. • All letters may be shortened, edited or rejected for reasons of good taste, redundancy or volume of similar letters. • Letters must be topic oriented. They may not be directed toward individuals. Any letter directed to a specific individual may be edited or not printed. • No anonymous letters will be published. Writers must sign all letters and include a phone number or email address as well as a student identification number (none of which is published). Letters will not be printed without this verification. • Letters representing groups – or more than one individual – must have a singular representative clearly stated, with all necessary identification information. • Writers must wait 21 days before submitting successive letters – no exceptions. • Letters can be hand delivered or mailed to The Statesman in the TSC, Room 105, or can be e-mailed to statesman@aggiemail. usu.edu, or click on www.aggietownsquare.com for more letter guidelines and a box to submit letters. (Link: About Us.) Online poll It’s October and Halloween candy is already littering store shelves. What are you planning for a costume? • Superhero • Something historical • Cartoon character • Something scary • Whatever I can find in my closet, the dumpster or the DI Visit us on the Web at www.aggietownsquare. com to cast your vote. |
