White collar tower
In their Nov. 4 Firing Lines, Edward Oden and Nathan Friedman miss the larger point that no one has an inalienable right to a college education. And Oden's argument for more "affordable" higher education is just as egalitarian as the arguments for more "affordable" health care or more "affordable" housing.
In fact, higher education today is a giant middle class and upper-middle class welfare program, through which the white collar careers of thousands of students are subsidized by both state and federal taxpayers. More specifically, 18-24 year-olds not in college and working minimum wage jobs are helping to pay for the college educations of UT students. Where is the ethical justification for this wealth redistribution?
And what's so wrong with making those who benefit the most from a college degree - students and their parents - pay more of its costs? In fact, why should state and federal taxpayers not in college or without children in college be forced to contribute anything to higher education funding?
Any costs not covered by tuition, fees and endowments must be borne by the hapless, long-suffering taxpayer. To redress this injustice, tuition and fees should be raised dramatically and/or public universities' budgets should be cut to the point where students and their parents pay the full cost of a college education.
If America's current fiscal status quo isn't drastically reversed, today's students will inherit a multi-trillion dollar federal debt and will not be able to count on receiving Social Security and prescription drug coverage when they reach retirement. Yet, how can students rightfully argue for reductions in Social Security and Medicare spending while, with respect to higher education funding, students continue to feed at the government trough?
Clark Patterson UT alum
Complete consideration
Hooman Hedayati flagrantly distorts the facts when he states in his op-ed "Today's legal lynchings," (Dec. 7) that Michael Richard was executed "only because Texas Court of Criminal Appeals Presiding Judge Sharon Keller did not want to stay at work a few minutes past five o'clock to consider his appeal."
Michael Richard was executed because he sexually assaulted and then murdered Marguerite Dixon, before stealing two television sets and the Dixon family van. Despite overwhelming evidence against him and his confession to the crime, he turned down a plea bargain offering him life in prison and went to trial, where he was convicted and sentenced to capital punishment. Following 20 years on death row, where numerous appeals were considered and rejected, his lawyers attempted one last stalling tactic to delay the justice that had been assigned by the Texas legal system in accordance with all Texas and federal laws after the legally mandated time to do so had expired .
Hedayati uses an unfortunately common and cowardly tactic against capital punishment: downplaying or neglecting to mention the heinous crimes committed that led to the penalty and the effect on families, communities and society in general when an innocent person is made victim. Ad hominem attacks of racism and classism such as, "who cares about a black man getting executed anyway? Maybe she [Judge Keller] wanted to make it over to Whole Foods before the masses" attempt to earn with emotion what can't be earned with reason. From his tone of his article it is obvious he holds this judge in more contempt than an admitted murderer.
I would hope that the readers of Hedayati's column are not as intellectually dishonest as he is when pursuing goals they deem noble. It is entirely possible that capital punishment is unjust, but we will never get to that debate as long as people like Mr. Hedayati attempt to wrap the issue in emotion while hiding all of the relevant facts.
Cyrus Astaneh UT alum
YCT misses the mark
The YCT displayed the "ACLU's Solstice Barn" last week on the West Mall in yet another immature attempt to prove that they are intolerant, ill-informed, radically religious and partisan (as if we didn't know any of these things already). They displayed Joseph as a terrorist, the Three Wise Men as communists and Charles Darwin and House Speaker Nancy Pelosi mockingly as angels. The YCT propaganda being handed out at the insulting display explained that they wish to have their religion forced upon people against their will by the government in displays of Christian symbols on government property. As a Christian I am proud of the ACLU for helping to remove religious endorsement by the government because our great country respects all faiths, as well as the lack of religion. True ideological conservatives support the preservation of rights guaranteed in the Constitution, including the separation of church and state. Either they should call themselves the Young Conservative Christians, The Young Neo-Conservatives of Texas or open a chapter of the Republican Party. I find it offensive that they believe Christianity to be weak and incapable of convincing people to believe in its tenets without the sheer power of government force. I have no problems with the Nativity scene being displayed on private or church property. However, it is inherently wrong and un-American to place it on public land, owned by taxes, especially government buildings. Ironically, the YCT should thank the ACLU, because the ACLU defends their right to free speech and religion.
Garrett Mize Government sophomore Texas Freedom Network, Student Chapter president
Dreaming for peace
I want to thank The Daily Texan for doing an excellent job covering the Dream for Darfur event ("Dreaming for Darfur," Dec. 6). As the White Rose Society aimed to educate or remind the campus that China has been complicit in the Sudanese government's genocidal campaign against its own civilians in Darfur, we must also be aware that our own University system has had a complicit role in the Darfur genocide.
By means of the The University of Texas Investment Management Company pension fund system, parts of our tuition and other funds are invested in companies, some of which operate in Sudan. The gains from those investments are mainly used to pay the pensions of our staff and faculty at the various UT schools across the state. Among the most popular companies to invest in for such funds are names like PetroChina, the Chinese oil company, and its subsidiaries.
Despite numerous signatories to a petition filed by the White Rose Society on behalf of students and the support of key legislators at the Texas Capitol, the UTIMCO executives have been uncooperative and unwilling to explore the steps necessary to divest our money from companies trading with the Sudanese government. I urge all of you to look into the targeted model of divestment at www.sudandivestment.org and then join with the White Rose Society's efforts to divest our tuition dollars from supporting genocide.
We must pressure China to help end this genocide, but we cannot do so if we, ourselves, are complicit.
Leran Minc Government senior
Be the first to comment on this article!