Contact Us




The Arizona Daily Wildcat Online





News Sports Opinions Arts Classifieds

Friday March 30, 2001

Basketball site


Restaurant and Bar Guide
Daily Wildcat Alumni Site


Student KAMP Radio and TV 3

Arizona Student Media Website

Letters to the Editor

D'Angelo should withdraw from race

I have been following with some interest the election fiasco surrounding the Executive Vice President. Mr. D'Angelo has stated on several occasions that a primary goal in seeking to appeal his disqualification has been to "clear his name." Last week he was quoted in this newspaper as saying that the Supreme Court's decision to reinstate him as a candidate had, in fact, "cleared his name." He spoke too soon.

The Supreme Court's opinion states, in terms difficult for Mr. D'Angelo to misinterpret, that he knowingly committed a "gross violation of the [Election] Code." That is now an established fact beyond dispute. To that charge he has two possible campaign themes. Mr. D'Angelo must claim he either didn't read or understand the Election Code, making him an incompetent candidate, or that he knowingly violated the Election Code for personal advantage, making him a devious candidate lacking in the personal moral conviction to run within the rules. Either way he loses. This does not strike me as the type of argument that swirls around a person whose name has been cleared.

The Supreme Court has reinstated Mr. D'Angelo as a candidate after a strict interpretation of the Election Code. I understand their reasoning. But they have also made it clear, to anyone who would listen, that Mr. D'Angelo should withdraw from the race, and save the student body from the ugly fight ahead, and possible impeachment proceedings.

Indeed, if Mr. D'Angelo would like to clear his name he must take responsibility for his election code violation and withdraw from the race. His name and reputation are in his hands now. I am eager to see how serious he is about clearing them.

Erica Rocush

third year law student

President's actions bad for country, planet

Imagine how complex it would be to determine if human impact on the earth is beyond carrying capacity. Yet it is already being done. Conservative estimates of one model indicate we are already 30 percent over carrying capacity of the planet.

This is not good news. Bottom line is that the human species has accumulated a huge ecological debt. The challenge in our lifetimes will be an attempt to deal with the repercussions.

I am moved to submit this letter to the Wildcat by a statement released by our President of the United States who on March 28 confirmed withdrawal from the Kyoto agreement. This agreement (also left unratified by the U.S. Senate) was to be a global agreement to reduce emissions of carbon dioxide which accumulates in the atmosphere. The "precautionary principle" recognizes that the impacts of continued dumping of fossil fuel waste into the atmosphere may not produce the effects that many mainstream scientists think are possible (global warming, rising sea levels, intensified storms, crop failures, etc.), but prudence calls for action now-before stakes climb even higher.

By this inaction, I believe the President displays the worst of small mindedness. Aside from the fact that his administration is heavily loaded with one-way-thinking oil industry promoters (for a resource which will be depleted within the next 50 years at current consumption rates), he also now displays his lack of ability or willingness to engage in a contribution to global initiatives that benefit the whole earth-including the U.S.-in the long term. The United States, by virtue of its place in history and time, has the luxury of choosing whether to engage ecological responsibilities within a global community, or assume a defensive position requiring ever heavier armor.

Readers! Be concerned, educate yourselves about these issues, get active, and engage your government.

Ronald Proctor

architecture graduate student

UAPD unfairly targets youth

I am writing in response to Anthony Nelson's letter to the editor about how he thinks A.J. Montoy was not harassed by UAPD officers because he was Hispanic. I would agree that maybe Montoy was not harassed because he was Hispanic, but I am sure that he was at least harassed by the UAPD because he is young. Either way, that is a lawsuit.

This is the sad truth about the UAPD recently, and Mr. Nelson should know that, since he knows many of the officers at the UAPD.

My point is that police officers make mistakes, especially the ones at UAPD. Also, I would like to remind Mr. Nelson that everyone in this country is innocent until proven guilty, including A.J. Montoy. Even if Montoy is guilty of being a minor in possession of alcohol and having a fake ID, who cares? Oh no! What a criminal! Do you really think he is the first person on the UA campus to be guilty of either one of these minor crimes? Its not like the man killed someone or hurt anything. Give me a break!

Mike Jindrick

business sophomore