The best in last week's editorials from college campuses around the nation
Pell Grants should not be reduced
Federal Pell Grants should not be reduced or eliminated for middle-income college students.
If the tax tables are updated, about one quarter of the 5 million college students who receive Pell Grants will see their rewards reduced by an average of $300 next year.
Low-income students should not be affected by these changes; however, middle-income students could be affected greatly.
Of course, the government should give the most help to those who have the biggest disadvantages, but they should not stop helping those who are stuck in the middle, who have too little to pay their own way and too much to receive federal assistance.
It is in the county's best interest to fund education for those who can't afford it. Educating our citizens is one of the most worthwhile investments our country can make.
Students who receive reduced Pell Grants may only have the option of taking on more student loans or maybe even having to leave school.
College should be an option for everybody in America who wants an education, not just those who are the richest and the poorest.
- University of Oklahoma's
Oklahoma Daily
Corporate responsibility remains a problem
Twenty years ago, 40 tons of toxic gas leaked from a pesticide plant in Bhopal, India, killing thousands. The incident is generally called the worst industrial accident in history. What made the accident even more tragic was that most lives could have been saved if the local hospitals had known how to treat the victims. The accident should have been a turning point for corporate responsibility, but it never was.
The Union Carbide pesticide plant leaked methyl isocyanate gas in the early morning hours of Dec. 3, 1984. Because the gas is heavier than air it stayed close to the ground, sweeping into the homes of plant workers who had built their domiciles up to the fence of the plant.
According to the Bhopal Medical Appeal trust fund, a group still lobbying for Union Carbide to be held responsible, it was later found that none of the plant's six safety systems were operational. Furthermore, the plant hesitated about informing the local hospital about how to properly treat patients. Two thousand people died, and an estimated 200,000 to 600,000 were injured.
The area remains largely contaminated even after Union Carbide abandoned the site, and locals still suffer an increased cancer rate.
It is unacceptable that corporations still have the same rights and protections as individuals, yet cannot be held accountable in the same way.
If there is to be any idea of corporate responsibility, this has to change.
- University of South Florida's
The Oracle
Proposed cell phone ban promotes safety
For well over a year now, HB 210 has been languishing in the Ohio House. Most people have not heard of this bill, but if it passes, it will affect a great number of Ohioans. HB 210 would restrict the use of mobile phones in motor vehicles. Most people's first knee-jerk reaction to this is to reject the issue. But after some thought and a closer look at the bill, we think that HB 210 isn't such a bad idea.
To begin with, all drivers with temporary permits would be prohibited from using mobile phones while the car is in motion.
Also, people with regular driver's permits would be prohibited from using a mobile phone unless they are reporting an emergency situation or are using a hands-free phone. Drivers will be permitted to report accidents and drunken drivers to the authorities while driving. They will also be able to use their phones as long as they are hands-free, such as a speakerphone, or if they are using one of the microphone systems widely available.
A third provision of the law would require the State Highway Patrol to collect data on traffic accidents in which cell phone use was a factor. Currently, it is impossible to tell how dangerous a problem cell phone use is because the state does not report that information.
But for the sake of safety, we should be paying attention to the road while we're driving. HB 210 would not prevent us from using cell phones in vehicles altogether, it would only require us to use phones that do not require the use of our hands. That's not too much of a concession to make if it will save people's lives.
- Kent State University's
Daily Kent Stater