Arizona Daily Wildcat Online
Front Page
· Basketball
· Columnists
Live Culture
Police Beat
Online Crossword
Photo Spreads
Special Sections
The Wildcat
Letter to the Editor
Wildcat staff
Job Openings
Advertising Info
Student Media
Arizona Student Media info
UATV - student TV
KAMP - student radio
The Desert Yearbook
Daily Wildcat staff alumni


Arizona Daily Wildcat
Tuesday, January 20, 2004
Print this

Students have chance to respond to activity fee

Recently, the idea of a student activity fee has surfaced at the University of Arizona. There was even an article, "ASUA asks students for activity fee," written to further explicate this idea. Many schools within the PAC-10, as well as many of our peer institutions, have a student activity fee, which raises the question of whether or not a student activity fee is appropriate for our student body.

With less state funding, the largest tuition increase in state history, another increase to follow, college fees and the proliferation of other fees around the university being loaded on the backs of students, a student activities fee is a difficult topic for most students.

To correct the recent article, ASUA does not have a formal position in regard to a student activities fee. Due to an expressed interest from various groups on campus, members within ASUA are researching the notion of a student activity fee in conjunction with the Collaboration Board. ASUA has directed efforts to gathering complete and accurate information for students to make an accurate choice when determining the need for a student activity fee. Surveys, focus groups and data from other schools nationwide are being compiled in order to better equip students to make an informed decision regarding this topic.

In order for the student activity fee to be on the spring election ballot, a referendum needs to be passed by the ASUA Undergraduate Senate.

If students have feedback about the possibility of a student activity fee, they should call the ASUA Senate at 621-ASUA or attend a senate meeting and make a statement at the call to the audience portion of the meeting.

Melanie Rainer
business economics senior
ASUA executive vice president

Alumni Plaza sure to be worth the wait, like ILC

This letter is in regard to complaints about the construction for the new Alumni Plaza. I remember when I first came to UA, there was a huge construction project to renovate the new Student Union, and everyone whined and bitched and moaned about it. But in retrospect, it was completely worth the wait for the construction. Every time I look out the windows of the Koffler building and see that magnificent cruise-ship-on-land that replaced an old, ugly building, it makes me feel like a jackass for being annoyed at the construction. So, for the new students that were not here to experience the construction of the new union: Please stop whining. When it's done you will be grateful. Thank you, Pete Likins!

Jakob Schanzer
chemistry senior

Plaza an inconvenient, large waste of money

I have become used to taking detours on campus over the last couple years, but I never thought I would have to walk around a site called Alumni Plaza. This is by far the most absurd use of funds I have seen.

The alumni should not need a place to call their own when they come to visit the campus. The university campus and its goal to provide a better education are what should be praised. Let's build a monument to students who no longer attend the university. How absurd is that?

How can the alumni be proud and allow the construction of such a monument when we are facing a budget crisis? Right now students cannot register for courses they need, teachers are still not being paid what they deserve, and all this while administrators are calling for a tuition hike.

Yes, I understand that the alumni play an integral part in the university community, but their generous contributions should be used to further education, not construct monuments.

We do not need a monument to honor alumni; the University of Arizona as a campus and educational institution is a monument in itself. I am certain that the alumni and future graduates will not return to campus to visit a plaza built in their name but to remember where they once took a class, where they once walked down the hallway with a professor or had lunch with their friends on the grass. Maybe I should go into concrete mixing; that way I'll be able to spend more time at the UA.

Chris de Barros
media arts senior

Students, not parents, responsible for poor

This is in response to Melissa Sotomayor's letter from Thursday's paper. I honestly hope she was joking or that I read her words wrong. I agree with Melissa that "if minors drink and get caught, they have no one to blame but themselves," but that completely contradicts her earlier point that "if a parent condones and/or enables a child's illegal behavior, society cannot expect that child to behave in a respectful manner and accept responsibility for his or her actions." Uh, yes society can!

I understand that it's more difficult for children to be held accountable or feel convicted about bad (or even illegal) behavior if their parents aren't punishing them. But people know right from wrong, and they especially know legal from illegal. While we all come from different cultures, backgrounds and family circumstances, it would be foolish to excuse disrespectful and irresponsible behavior because someone's parents didn't teach him or her that acting illegally is wrong.

Of course I understand that a middle school student is less motivated in school when they have no one at home to encourage them. And I know that many kids end up on the streets, joining gangs to feel some kind of belonging. But we're grown up now, people. We're in college. Blaming one's parents for one's illegal drinking is just plain ridiculous. You know it's illegal. And if you haven't heard that underage drinking is against the law, I ask you, in the words of the wise and mighty Strong Bad, "What's your freakin' problem?"

Jenna Jensen
undeclared freshman

'Dictator' Bush stifles protest at televised events

Hats off to the good citizens of Atlanta who made their voices heard Thursday during President Bush's visit to the King Center.

Despite coordinated efforts to shield the president from criticism, protestors managed to get within earshot of the dictator himself.

While Bush has proclaimed his love of free speech when ridiculed in foreign parliament, he uses every opportunity to silence his critics.

The Secret Service now routinely forces those who do not support Bush into designated "protest zones" far removed from the president's location - and out the media's view.

His supporters, of course, are allowed to get close enough to shake his hand. Those who have tried to sidestep this policy have been arrested.

Even when they could not hide the dissenters at the King Center in a protest zone, they tried to block them from view with buses.

Fortunately, the crowds were not deterred and continued their loud chants of protest.

Thank you for not allowing the president free reign to pretend he has done anything for the causes MLK supported.

Michael Galhouse
business management junior

Republican Party ignores needs of American poor

My fellow students, over the past few years a revelation has come to me.

All my life I thought, as I was taught, that the Republican Party rightly served my God, as it strived to set right the wrongs of abortion policy.

But as I delve into the teachings of Christ it becomes ever more apparent that the Republicans have turned a blind eye to one of the most important lessons, Mark 12:31: "Love thy neighbor as thy self."

This insight did not come to me as a grain of salt.

It worked instead rather like the trickle-down effect is supposed to work.

The evidence built up and built up until there was no denying it.

The party of my family, my church and, until recently, myself had abandoned those neighbors of ours who need the most help.

Whole families live in poverty, their only crime being born to poor parents and attending failing schools.

The Republican Party hides their heresy under terms like "the trickle-down effect" and "economic stimulus package."

The truth is, if we give tax cuts to all and most goes to the wealthy, then some of that money will go back into the economy.

However, if we give that money to the poor, all of the money will go directly back into the economy.

If all the money goes right into American businesses, then more jobs will be created.

The aptly named trickle-up effect would do much more to stimulate the economy, and would put our government back in line with the teaching of our Lord.

Matt Harrison
UA alumnus

Hussein's capture a good omen for war on terror

The capture of Saddam Hussein is a comfort to the Iraqi people.

All the world hopes it will bring a peaceful and independent Iraq closer.

It is also a triumph in the war on terror - not because Saddam had ties to international terrorism, but because he did not.

Now that Saddam is neutralized, he can no longer serve as a distraction from America's real and urgent anti-terrorism goal: destroying al-Qaeda's terrorist network.

A bogeyman in the bush is only an old man in the hand.

The disproportionate threat that the Bush Administration created of Saddam can be debunked now that he's been captured.

Saddam can no longer be used by the Bush Administration to mislead people as to Iraq's role in Sept. 11, 2001, and his evil can no longer distract us from Bush's deeply flawed strategy in Iraq.

Bush must now focus on genuine threats to American security.

The question that should have been on the lips of the American president every day since Sept. 11, 2001, must once again become the focus of the war on terror: Where is Osama bin Laden?

Michael Bryan
third-year law student

Write a Letter to the Editor
Apathy is hardly an excuse
Activity fee ridiculous, unfair
View Points
Restaurant and Bar guide
Search for:
advanced search Archives

Webmaster -
© Copyright 2003 - The Arizona Daily Wildcat - Arizona Student Media