Jordan River Forum

Ben Piper's recent column about drilling for oil in the Arctic Refuge showed careful thought and consideration. Piper obviously cares a great deal about our country and that is very nice to see. But I do believe he has been misled by the Bush administration. Piper states that the U.S. Geological Survey confirmed that oil exploration in ANWR would have little, if any, negative environmental impact on the wildlife native to the Refuge. According to a column by CNN's Bill Press, the initial report from the USGS was very critical of drilling in ANWR. Over 12 years scientists collected information on the Arctic Refuge and determined that drilling for oil would decimate the environment. The day the report came out, Interior Secretary Gale Norton ordered the scientists to come up with a different estimate of the environmental damage drilling would do to the area. And what do you know, several days later the USGS released another report claiming that drilling would cause little harm to the environment. These actions show that the Bush administration is simply trying to do whatever it can to satisfy the oil industry and give President Bush an issue to use in the next election. Bush would be able to claim that he is providing America with a large energy supply for the future by opening ANWR to drilling and keeps his campaign donors happy. Truth is, there really isn't all that much oil in ANWR to begin with. If the drilling is approved it will take 10 years to set up. To make matters worse, according to Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham, there is only enough oil to last 12 months. It seems government dollars and time would be better used to find alternative energy sources that would last much longer that 12 months. Jeremy Hackerd
Junior Insight Internet service source of frequent complaints In the last five months we have not had a single day or night where our cable Internet service has not been interrupted. We have complained about this continually with no favorable result. About a month or a bit more ago, we were switched over to Insight Internet service with no change in the quality of service. We continue to have outages daily. Ninety percent of my business functions are done online as part of my job as Communications Director of Homeyeah.com. Outages like this are unacceptable. I have never in my life been as disappointed in the quality of product, customer service and technical support. Since the switchover to Insight, we were given a customer support toll-free number for problems with the Internet service. We have called that number more than 15 times since it came into existence. Never once were we able to get through to a technician or customer support person. We have timed our calls and waits on hold…I even have record of a few of these calls and the length of time on hold from my cellular phone that I used specifically for this purpose. The longest wait before giving up was 1 hour and 42 minutes. We want Insight to know that we are cancelling our cable service and cable Internet service as of April 27. We will never use their services again, nor will any of my family. We are also going to post a copy of this letter in my local newspaper, the local chapter of the Better Business Bureau, and send it in e-mail to our local radio stations along with ideas for alternatives to your service for television entertainment and Internet service. We won't reach everyone, but if we reach enough people, then maybe, just maybe, you at Insight might then see that your lack of decent business practices actually hurt the people you rely on to keep you in business. You had your chance, Insight. You have lost a family of customers…for life. Probably more than that. Definitely more than that if we have our way. Aaron M. Daggy
Alumnus Team Major Taylor makes mockery of race This team is making a mockery of this year's race. Arbitration, schmarbitration! What it really boils down to is they cheated. This Weir kid knew it, his teammates knew it and even this "good Samaritan" Bishop knew it. Maybe IUSF has erred by not acting as swiftly as they could have, but who really expects a team to cheat to try to win Little 500? I mean come on; it's an intramural bike race! Of course the Taylor team doesn't want to re-open the issue because they know there's hard evidence against them now. I know several of the riders and these kids work year round for this event, but they do it fairly. If they wanted to race for money against these Category 1 people, they would. For those that are claiming discrimination, the only "race" that matters here is Little 500. Get over yourselves. Major Taylor should be disqualified for this year and for future years for the stunt that they have tried to pull. The other 32 teams have worked too hard to be jerked around like this. Jeremy Hambrick
Junior Research university acceptance statistics, you may be surprised This letter is in response to Dana Zito and her assumption, stated in her April 11 column, "My Brother the Scholar," that her brother has been the victim of reverse discrimination. It is strange to me, Zito, that you should choose to focus solely on race as the reason for your brother's being denied admission to an elite university. Why did you not mention the students accepted who were legacies of the university, who could afford to hire SAT coaches and attend summer college prep camps, who attended boarding schools with acceptance agreements with the university, whose parents are faculty members or make significant financial contributions to the university? Might not one of these students also have stolen your brother's spot? Since you did not name the university from which your brother was rejected, I cannot speak with specificity to its particular admissions policies or statistics. But I can say, with due respect to your brother's accomplishments, that his 3.7 GPA is not exceptional among applicants to highly competitive universities, and his eighteenth percentile class ranking might have put him at a disadvantage -- most students accepted to elite schools are ranked within at least the top tenth of their class. I suggest you verify the statistics of this unnamed university, which are published yearly, and see how your brother compares. You might also note the percentages of minorities in attendance at this university. More likely than not, you will find that they are much lower than the at-large percentages of minorities in our society, suggesting that societal inequalities still exist that bar some minorities from gaining an equal opportunity to attend college. You say that your brother was "robbed," but upon a more careful investigation you might find that the horde of bandits riding off with your brother's education is smaller than you think. Joanna Lin Want
Senior Peace Camp flag offensive Every day when I walk home, I pass by the peace camp. Every time I walk past it, I get more and more offended by their mockery of the American flag. In case you have not seen it, on the top of one of their tents, they have a flag which looks like the American flag but is different. In place of the stars, they have juxtaposed a peace symbol. I feel offended because by putting a peace symbol over the 50 stars, which are meant to represent each state, they are in effect saying that their opinion about the war overrides the opinions of everyone else and is representative of the wishes of everyone else. It is true that they have First Amendment right to voice their opinion, but I also have a First Amendment right to voice mine. Michael S. Young
Junior RPS decision to fire RAs ill-adivsed It is rare that I feel strongly critical of RPS. I have spent the last year as a center president working with them to improve life in the halls and while in that time I have definitely seen some problems, and worked to fix them, I understand the frustrations they face and the difficult nature of providing services for ten thousand students. But in the case of the RAs who were recently fired, I am of the definite opinion that RPS made the dead wrong decision. Don't get me wrong, I do not defend the actions of the RAs. They deserved to be reprimanded for their actions. But by firing RAs, RPS isn't just censuring them for their behavior (which it could do in a myriad of other ways) but damaging entire communities. RPS says that while RAs exist for the enforcement of the rules their primary role is to provide support for the students. The decisions made system wide are an obvious reflection on the value of this statement. Communities are broken, residents are upset, even angry, and the direct support for those residents is gone. To top off this incredible mess of misaligned priorities, and a disregard for the well being of residents there are only three weeks of school left, three very difficult weeks. Little 500 and finals week are upon us, and the support for students in these high stress weeks is even more imperative than normal. It has been stripped away from them by egos and bureaucracy. Finally, what about the RAs who were fired, and the staff they work with? These people are students too, folks. And RPS is showing blatant disregard for their academic success. Can you imagine having to find a new place to live in only one week, right now? And what about the current RAs whose responsibilities have just increased immensely? How are they supposed to manage this new workload in addition to the already increasing end of the year pressure? Actions speak louder than words, and RPS has made it clear that RAs exist to police the centers during times when the administration is nervous, not to provide support for the residents during these same high stress times. Further, it shows that their desire for control takes precedence over the need to work to build a community in the halls. Residence halls without community are dorms, nothing more. John Schlafer
President, Collins Living-Learning Center Education deserves funding I am writing in response of the column titled "Money Wasted On Education" (April 10) by Brock Levin. I don't see the connection between a little kid having a lollipop and public school funding. The gym teachers in Illinois who are making six-figure salaries are probably coaches of state championship teams which brings more money into that particular school. I'm not trying to stick up for those school systems that waste money, but the fact is technology increases the quality of education. Some public schools can't afford books, let alone a $100 dollar game of Candyland. Then again, I don't know any school that owns a Candyland game, unless it is preschool. You act like teachers don't undergo evaluations, and recent legislation has reformed the standardized testing. You also talk about reducing the teachers from 1,000 to 10. Tell that to areas that are in a shortage of teachers, like inner city schools. You talk about having more qualified teachers that must have a higher salary. The way the state budget is going now, public schools can't afford to keep the teachers they already have. The fact is that you are a conservative Republican who is blabbing about how much money you are going to make with your finance degree. Great! Send your kids to a private school so you can plant the seeds of conservatism and oppression in them. This article you wrote made you look like a complete idiot, do us all a favor, stick to your finance degree. Bob Shank
Sophomore Zinn critique off the mark Ben Piper's April 8 column, "Zinn off the mark with ideas," is itself off the mark in a number of ways. First, Piper frames his column as a critique of Howard Zinn's April 5 lecture, yet Piper's arguments have little to do with Zinn's speech. While Piper focuses on issues of globalization, Zinn simply did not discuss these issues in depth. Piper would do well to pay attention to Zinn's words before entering into a critique of them. Second, Piper mentions several times the race to the bottom argument against globalization, yet he never establishes what it is. How are we to take his criticisms seriously if he does not make clear the arguments to which he is opposed? Put simply, the argument posits that countries competing for foreign capital will lower labor and environmental regulations in order to decrease the production costs of foreign firms. A reduction of standards in one country then triggers an even greater reduction in a competing country in order to attract more capital, and so on. Hence, a race to the bottom. This process is evidenced in the maquiladoras of Northern Mexico and the sweatshops of the Global South. Finally, while Piper accuses leftists of being "nihilistic," he engages in the gruesome nihilism of denying the realities of poverty and environmental destruction. Piper asserts that the wealth gap is shrinking through globalization, but the gap between the world's richest 20 percent and its poorest 20 percent was 74:1 in 1997, compared to 30:1 in 1960. Further, three billion people (roughly half the world population) live on less than $2 a day. Clearly this problem cannot be written off as a necessary transition to the long-run cornucopia that the free market "guarantees." The environment, too, suffers greatly from globalization. Low and middle-income nations, as of 1995, had an annual deforestation rate of 113,418 square kilometers, most of this in rain forest areas. The forces of globalization are exacting heavy human and ecological tolls, and, if we are truly to become "global citizens," we have an even greater responsibility to combat suffering and environmental devastation everywhere. James Bourke
Freshman Letter misrepresented GLBT Office I'd like to clarify that the letter I wrote, ("Coach Davis' donation says homosexuality,") April 2, to which Angela Retek ("Davis' donation should be praised," April 4) and Matthew Stevenson ("Davis, others should be free to support own causes," April 9) responded was written on my own behalf only, and without any connection to the GLBT Office. As a graduate intern at the GLBT Office, I am not an official voice of the office, and my opinions are my own alone. I agree wholeheartedly with Stevenson's assertion that, "An organization such as the GLBT Services…should not be attacking coach Davis or his church because of their religious beliefs." Fortunately, the GLBT Office did not attack coach Davis. The GLBT Office is a Safe Zone, pledged to respect and value every person who walks in the door, regardless of race, religion, sexual orientation, gender, or ethnicity. I regret my misrepresentation as a spokesperson for the GLBT Office and wish to make it very clear my letter was my opinion only and not the voice of the IU GLBT Office. Emily Nagoski
Graduate student