888 items found for your search. If no results were found please broaden your search.
(01/23/12 11:31pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>As many of us are doubtlessly aware, recent reform of Health Care legislation means that health insurance companies are now required to cover prescription birth control as a preventative care measure without a co-pay.This is controversial in much the same way that the pope is a little religious, and revolves around some of the same tenets. Some see this act of reform as little more than a cheap attempt to appeal to a constituency the president previously alienated by overruling a proposal that would have legalized the sale of emergency birth control medicines to minors. Others argue these efforts do not go far enough, the rationale being that many people who are unable to afford birth control are also unlikely to have health insurance. But under the new policy, young women, many college age, would remain covered by any insurance their parents possess, thus offering options to the demographic most at-risk for unplanned pregnancy. Predictably, the majority of the resistance comes from conservatives and Christians who have raised moral and theological objections to this measure. The Catholic Church has formally denounced the change, vocally reiterating its belief that emergency contraceptives, such as the “morning-after pill,” are considered abortifacients. Nevertheless, advocates of the bill praise the administration’s work in curbing unwanted pregnancies. President of NARAL Pro-Choice America Nancy Keenan is one of many supporters, claiming, “Currently, nearly one in three women finds it difficult to pay for birth control, and that’s why the United States has a far higher unintended-pregnancy rate than other industrialized countries.” In spite of the numerous criticisms leveled against this reform, we applaud it as a large first step in the right direction. Following so closely on the heels of numerous states’ decisions to cease funding Planned Parenthood, it is high time government concerned itself with the issues of women’s health. President Barack Obama’s administration pragmatically acknowledges that sex — beyond its reproductive function — is a lot of fun. This position has not been publicly assumed, ahem, since the Clinton era. It’s good to know someone else agrees that the disapproval of the Christians is a lesser concern than millions of unintended children being born to unprepared, unfit or unwilling mothers.But never let it be said that we don’t keep an open mind.If the advent of free birth control will be the death of morality and values by plunging the world into an unspeakable apocalypse of depravity and anonymous sex, please know that newspaper columnists make fantastic lovers.
(09/22/11 11:34pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Obama gave the solar company Solyndra his stamp of approval back in 2009 when he allotted it $527 million in federal loans as part of the infamous stimulus package. The specific aim was to create green jobs. It seems that nothing is going in the favor of the president these days. As Solyndra declares bankruptcy, the GOP uses its demise to call the Obama green jobs creation plan a failure. Does this mark the first major scandal of the Obama administration and the end of solar power? Or is this financial fiasco simply the result of a drop in the price of solar modules, which would actually be beneficial to the eco-minded U.S. consumer?It is important to understand that Solyndra produced a specific commercial solar unit. According to Ken Zweibel of the Solar Institute, this technology was “unusual and unproven.” This, combined with the fact that Chinese competition has led to a 42 percent drop in the price of solar technology during the past year, puts the Obama administration in an embarrassing situation, but it does not suggest the end of solar technology. This green technology is actually becoming increasingly accessible as prices continue to drop. This is damaging to highly specific Solyndra but potentially excellent news for Mother Nature. Our continued reliance on fossil fuels does not have only economic ramifications. It also comes at a huge diplomatic, human and environmental price. While British Petroleum is picking up the multi-billion dollar bill for the 2010 Deepwater Horizon oil spill, fishermen, families and wildlife across the Gulf of Mexico are also paying the toll and probably will be for years, perhaps even decades, to come. For those who are all too ready to disregard the environmental costs, consider this: we read in the news on a near-daily basis that we are running out of oil. Wouldn’t it be wise to believe this and continue to invest in green energy before it’s too late? “Drill, baby, drill” is a temporary solution. Before you bash solar power as a liberal, hippie pipe-dream, remember this: there are no more dinosaurs dying to feed our ever-growing hunger for refined petroleum, but the sun is still shining.
(10/17/08 5:27am)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>“Make no small plans for Indiana University,” IU President Michael McRobbie said in his first-ever State of the University speech Tuesday, echoing the words of former IU President Herman B Wells.The speech was aimed at faculty and staff but should be of great interest to students as well. The tone was largely optimistic. In his address, McRobbie spoke about the construction or planned construction of buildings throughout the University for business, information technology, life sciences and the arts, and the need to expand research.Most importantly, McRobbie was fairly frank about IU’s prospects given the current financial crisis. He admitted that while the past year was the best ever for external research funding, government funding could be scaled back. He also acknowledged that returns on endowments – a major source of income for the University – could go down. Many universities have had to cut back so far. Boston University’s president recently announced he would freeze hiring and stop all building projects that had not already been approved. Attempting to tighten the state budget, Colorado Gov. Bill Ritter tabled all taxpayer-supported construction, stalling several campus building projects.In his speech, McRobbie applauded those in charge of IU’s financial security, such as the University Treasurer MaryFrances McCourt and IU Vice President and Chief Financial Office Neil Theobald. So far, as IU has avoided the fate of some other universities, that applause is probably deserved.It appears that the University is being managed with a good deal of perspective. McRobbie acknowledged that hiring in non-faculty positions would have to be slowed. He also claimed he would still put effort into improving IU’s international experience as well as certain scholarships.IU will probably have to make cuts. McRobbie hinted that sustainability will probably not be a top spending priority. In the past we applauded McRobbie’s decision to approve new proposals designed to increase sustainability, save money and allow greater cooperation between administration, academics and campus utilities.It would be unfortunate if a program that seems to be already lacking administrative support gets pushed into the background. McRobbie’s plan to engage in “relentless but responsible optimism” might yet guide the University through this mess.
(10/15/08 12:39pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Mitch Daniels viewed getting arrested in college as his biggest mistake, much of Andy Horning’s Libertarian policy revolves around how he found Jesus, and Jill Long Thompson grew up on a family farm learning the value of hard work and integrity.Hoosiers couldn’t be more prepared to vote Nov. 4. Not unless they wanted to know a little more about the issues.The gubernatorial debate held Tuesday in the IU Auditorium focused mostly on personal questions of character and ethics. Long Thompson kept trying to make the case against Daniels. There were a lot of numbers. She claimed unemployment had gone up by 2 percent. The number has fluctuated from 6.1 percent in January 2005 to 4.6 percent in October 2006 to 6.4 percent in August 2008. She also claimed Hoosiers earn 87 cents on the dollar for everyone else in the country.The tension that sprung up between her and Daniels was the best part of the debate. The moderator was right to allow extensive rebuttal. Long Thompson, once again, tried to frame Daniels as a tax raiser. Daniels did, as one of his first acts as governor, propose a 1 percent surtax on incomes of more than $100,000 for one year. Long Thompson’s repeated attacks against the governor’s cigarette tax increase, however, continue to seem odd seeing that revenue from the tax went to creating a new program to expand health insurance coverage. Long Thompson also charged Daniels with botching the investment of funds gained from privatizing the toll road. She suggested much of it had been invested in junk bonds and Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.Thompson seemed to be stretching and Daniels was right in pointing out that Indiana Treasurer Richard Mourdock is responsible for managing these funds and holds his own elected office. At the same time Daniels suggested, rather oddly, that the investment was good now because Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have been taken over by the government.Some of the back-and-forth seemed to irritate Daniels, who let out a comment about wanting to see Long Thompson “kinder and gentler tonight” – probably making quite a few viewers squirm. As for Long Thompson, the way she tried to twist every question into a K.O. made it clear she thought she needed to win this debate. At points Daniels was confident enough to compliment Democrats and avoid religious pandering. Long Thompson, by stretching too many of her arguments, came off as a candidate who is still just trying to break through.
(05/12/08 5:49pm)
____simple_html_dom__voku__html_wrapper____>Maybe your mother got it wrong. When she dried your tears and reassured you that those mean things said at the lunch table were just words, she might have made a mistake. In her defense, your mother didn’t know about Facebook.A suit coming out of Roncalli High School in Marion County represents the latest example of a growing number of cases involving cries of Facebook defamation. Dean of Students Tim Puntarelli and the Roman Catholic Archdiocese are suing Facebook and the anonymous creator of a profile that allegedly embarrassed and defamed the principal and the school. This case and others like it popping up across the country raise fundamental questions about free speech. As it stands, the First Amendment protects the right of the people to say what they please even if it is unpopular or critical of others.When the Founding Fathers sat down to pen the Constitution they had in mind the oppressive English crown that outlawed speech critical of its leaders. Yet, freedom of speech becomes illegal when it infringes on the rights of others. Speech that is deliberately untrue or that rests on faulty assumptions can constitute defamation. If the speech injures a person’s reputation or intentionally causes emotional distress, the speech becomes illegal. However, this protection is not meant to protect against hurt feelings. In the 1988 decision Hustler v. Falwell, the Supreme Court upheld the right to parody speech. In other words, Americans have a right to criticize and to make fun of people, so long as the medium cannot reasonably be seen as factual.Facebook presents pranksters with the perfect opportunity for parody. People “Facebook-friend” everything from chemical compounds to hamsters to deceased university chancellors. If it is decided that no reasonable person would think Puntarelli was acting as himself, then the profile could be considered a legal parody. The question then becomes: Can a facebook profile be assumed to accurately reflect the subject’s identity?The fact of the matter is that all too often those assumptions are made. A 2007 study from the University of Massachusetts-Dartmouth that questioned 453 college-admissions offices found 21 percent are checking social-networking profiles on sites such as MySpace and Facebook. Colleges and employers alike are flocking to social-networking sites to scope out the character of their applicants. If Facebook is going to be used to determine a candidate’s qualification for a job or scholarship, we think Tim Puntarelli has a right to protect his virtual identity. By contacting students with inappropriate messages while assuming the principal’s name, the profile creator did more than parody – he tarnished Puntarelli’s virtual character. In a world where online expression is becoming increasingly more prevalent and important, we respect the right of people to say controversial and critical things. Yet, as a person’s identity is growing to include their cyber identity as well, we think assuming someone else’s name unless it is a blatant parody is wrong. In a time of instant access and mass communication, words can hurt.
(12/06/07 5:39am)
Studying abroad is a great way to differentiate yourself as a student, possibly cheaper than a semester’s tuition at IU, and apparently a major threat to your mental health. \nDuring the annual conference of the Canadian Bureau for International Education last week, several officials stressed the mental health-risks associated with studying abroad. Students who are miles away from home may endure long periods of extreme loneliness and cultural isolation, which can lead to severe mental health problems including depression, suicide and other psychotic incidents.\nIn order to combat this problem, some at the conference, such as Lynne A. Mitchell, who is director of international programs at the University of Guelph in Ontario, suggested setting up mental health aid programs. These programs would work on the same principle as first aid, giving non-professionals the tools to deal with an immediate mental health crisis instead of waiting for that crisis to blow out of proportion. \nIU should be mindful of this suggestion, especially given the recent acknowledgment that we are one of the top schools for international education in the country. Being a university in the top 20 nationally, both in terms of international students here on campus and IU students in study-abroad programs, means that we should be wary of the health risks associated with such programs. \nHowever, there are also risks associated with putting too much of our mental health care in the hands of those who are not trained professionals. Even trained psychiatrists, if not careful, can do more harm than good to their patients. \nSome also pointed out the risk to student privacy. Students going to see counselors shouldn’t have to worry about the confidentiality of things said in confidence. It is true that when someone talks about topics such as suicide that information can no longer be private but the line between being distraught and being dangerously distraught is not always so clear. If, in an effort to increase access to mental health resources, non-professional counselors are employed, how are these counselors supposed to accurately judge whether what a student says is dangerous or not? \nDespite these risks, this Editorial Board is largely in favor of expanding mental health services, even through non-professional means, both to international students here and to our students abroad. The risks are real, but as long as mental health aid programs are structured in intelligent ways, they clearly have benefits.\nThere is still no substitute for professional help when it is needed, but giving staff involved with international programs the tools they need to help in a crisis will help identify those who need help in time to prevent further breakdown. Calls to have counselors attached to the international office, where international students whose culture does not include counseling may feel more comfortable, are probably also long overdue.\nStudying abroad is going to become more important, not less, for college educations. We need smart policies to keep the students involved in these programs healthy.
(05/10/07 3:13pm)
Listen to the IDS editorial board meeting podcast.
(05/07/07 4:00am)
College may not always be fun and games, but considering the average student spends a mere 12 to 18 hours in actual class, let’s face the facts: for undergraduates, this place is basically a summer camp. It’s most true for the IU men’s basketball team, who ranked 277th out of 325 Division I teams in terms of academic performance. \nThe Academic Progress Rate (APR) is a measure of a team’s academic eligibility, and their ability to retain players on a term-by-term basis. Two points are awarded per player per team, one point for being eligible, and the other for staying with the same athletics department. IU wasn’t penalized for falling into the 15th percentile, below Evansville, IUPUI, Butler, and basically the rest of Indiana schools, though the score – 890 of a possible 1000 points – puts the team below the cut off point, and will subject the team to scholarship losses in the coming year. \nTo many it seems unfair to punish the players themselves; after all, they are under constant stress to perform. Between the endless practices, away games, and time spent filling the 40-gallon gas tanks of their Escalades, the basketball team has almost no downtime. If they’re not running suicides down the court, they’re lifting weights or working on their endurance. That leaves precious little time for biology and calculus.\nSo as a school we ought to support our athletics teams, like citizens support their troops, right? The basketball team in particular is the heart and soul of the University, so professors should cut the basketball team as much slack as they need to complete the bare minimum course work. Right? It’s only fair, considering how much revenue they bring in for the school.\nMaybe the scholarship money should come out of Coach Sampson’s salary, because when you get right down to it, he’s really at fault. Right? Well, in fact, most of the under performing players are Mike Davis’ recruits, and may not have the same work ethic under the new coach. Nevertheless, Sampson has a duty to his school and his team to keep the players eligible and educated.\nLike Bob Knight did when he ran the team, Sampson needs to do more to ensure that our players get the best education that IU can provide since only a handful of players will turn professional. It’s Sampson’s responsibility to hire tutors, organize supplemental lectures and generally make every humanly possible effort for his players. Right?\nWrong.\nThe basketball players are individually responsible for their grades, which means juggling course work and court time, because they are different. While it’s true that their athletic obligations will often conflict with their academic obligations, there are ways to work around those limitations. The Editorial Board recognizes the unique position that the basketball team holds in the University, it’s important that the team realize they are students before players, and that IU is a college first, and a playground second.