Page 11 • Monday, February 8, 1999
igesmtting a cap on learning
tate legislature will end up hurting students
i search of knowledge rather than slackers
ROCKMAN
ilion
y will addrf; I eginning the Fall Semester
>tinence tor | 0 ^ 1999, resident students
"enrolled at state institutions
d Abstirr education who have at|
is and risks(
< as d giftlroi
education c
r said somei
■nee even®
;aid.
ated at least 170 credit hours
be required to pay out-of-
> tuition rates.
or these students this means
will now be paying $249 per
ester credit hour instead of
per semester credit hour.
Zach
HALL
> only fool-pro
ex u ally transr
ju from some;
1 not," Wings
his is due to the passage of Senate Bill 1907,
AggiesSisi ;h Ivas intended to put more responsibility on
cal science: ents to take care of their educational require-
»ortant mes its ks soon as possible. Instead, it may end up
? everyone.' ishing students who are serious about getting an
<e precaun :at|on.
effective in: B ll907, often referred to as the “Slacker Bill”,
i birth comr; passed in 1998 during the 75th Legislative Ses-
. The legislature seems to have been influenced
eports of an increasing number of “career stu-
:s” who are racking up hours with no intent of
uaiing any time soon.
hereason many object to this “career education”
realise state taxpayers, in essence, subsidize as
h as 80 percent of a student’s education, and tax-
‘rspre having to foot the bill for students to take
aedt d or excessive hours,
appears, though, that legislators may not have
OROLOGI- sufficient research when they voted in favor of
1907.
(i from Pttge s the law stands, all resident students who have
npted 170 credit hours prior to the Fall 1999, re-
seminars) gi less of when they began undergraduate work, will
ants] a chanc pay out-of-state tuition.
peers are wort/hat this law means is all the hours a student has
interest to the -opted, including Q-drops, withdrawals and trans-
rd credit, will count toward his or her maximum
aid a currenti cre( |jt hours. Exceptions are made for students
rrnnar especu are enrolled in two or more baccalaureate degree
oject that tni. • ramS) w h 0 are double majors or who are enrolled
nem 's mvolie^ealth professional degree plan.
oJever, it does apply to students whose degree
1 ..s,luch as architecture, require 153 hours. In other
. Is if student changes his or her major even once,
iins the risk of surpassing the 170 credit hour
imum.
aying $249 instead of $36 is a stiff punishment for
'dent who has changed majors ; for a student who
, alien a variety of classes to explore what he
cl LCS :s to do after graduation or a student whose de-
M
^plan requires more than the usual 128 hours,
phife the intentions of the legislators are to punish
1 :er students’
and those who are not serious about
HCemeir ation ’ Should not punish those who see col
lege as a pursuit of knowledge.
To the credit of the legislators, they have responded
to the criticism that has been generated since the pas
sage of the bill. Currently, a bill is in the senate that
addresses many of the problems of the original senate
bill.
Authored by Sen. Teal Bivins, who also authored
S.B. 1907, Senate Bill 345 would “grandfather” the
original bill. This means any student who was en
rolled prior to the Fall 1999, whether he has taken 3
hours or 173 hours, will be exempt from the 170 hour
maximum.
Furthermore it takes into account the number of
credit hours required for a student to graduate. The
provision stipulates a student will be allowed 45 extra
hours in addition to the minimum required for his de
gree plan; after the additional 45 hours, a student is
required to pay out-of-state tuition.
However, the new bill does not make provisions for
those who have withdrawn from school or have trans
ferred hours from other state institutions that do not
apply to their degree at the new institution.
Therefore, if a student has transferred with 60
hours, but only 20 count toward his degree plan, he
still has 40 hours that count toward his extra 45 hours.
That leaves him with only 5 credit hours that he may
Q-drop, fail or withdraw from.
What the legislators do not seem to realize is that
there are many more students who fall under this cat
egory than those who are “mooching off the system.”
It is unfortunate higher education is seen as a pro
duction line of future money makers for the state and
not as an institution for the pursuit and expansion of
knowledge.
If the state wants to try and save taxpayers’ money
and hold career students accountable, then they need
to mandate that each individual institution set its own
policing system, instead of passing catch-all legislation
that punishes the innocent.
Individual state institutions would be given the
task of keeping track of how student’s hours are accu
mulated. It would not be too difficult to find the stu
dents who have changed majors three or four times
and hold them financially accountable. In addition, it
would allow schools to make exceptions for students
who have legitimate reasons for surpassing 170 credit
hours.
The state legislature will make a step in the right
direction toward modifying the “Slacker Bill” by pass
ing S.B. 345, particularly with its “grand-father”
clause. However, it must be careful not to damage
higher education by punishing the whole to get to a
few.
Zach Hall is a senior philosophy major
RUBEN DELUNA/Thi; Battalion
1999
Commerce without morality leads to a ruthless American society
t:
amu.
e your or t t | ie recen t
k World Eco-
Xmomic Forum
pbavos, Switzer-
United Nations
. tetary-General
ver t'W [ Aiman called for
February N erger of money
. morality. He
m-Fri 11 international
'inesses to pro-
Caleb
MCDANIEL
✓:e human rights, environmental con-
iusness and labor organization in
countries where they invest.
We have to choose between a global
•Ret driven only by calculations of
rt-term profit and one which has a
nan face,” Annan said in a New York
les article.
This and other clarion calls to re
in the humanitarian side of econom-
|are needed precisely because they
k neglected. Far from wearing a
rubric human face, the face of the
Iriness community is often one of
ty indifference to the common good.
Jnc le Sam especially has money on
jmind and dollar signs in his eyes.
and unfortunately, the kindred founda
tions of capitalism and democracy have
misled us to think the free market is al
ways intrinsically worthwhile.
However, the assumption that market
forces will make companies to behave
themselves is naive at best and nonsen
sical at worst.
In a world where the touch of a com
puter key can move billions of dollars
around the globe, eager investors can
tromp through developing economies like
a bull market in a china shop. The pur
suit of profit can often devolve into
greed.
Consequently, the United States must
be careful not to commit what Gandhi
listed as a cardinal social sin — com
merce without morality.
Annan’s concern about the need for
socially responsible businesses is
echoed around the world. There is a ris
ing awareness, especially in the emerg
ing world, that something is wrong with
a global economy capable of erasing
years of development because of the
whims of market sentiment.
Cutthroat competition can cut the
throats of Third World economies, and
on the fast track to exorbitant economic
growth, wealthy countries see more dol
lar signs than yield signs. On this high
way, roadkill is not rare.
Ultimately, though, the problems of a
global economy controlled by uncon
trollable capital flows will only be
solved when a greater sense of moral
responsibility is born among interna
tional businesses.
Until then, corporations will often
find they have a vested interest in not
being interested in the moral dimen
sions of commerce.
They can take advantage of labor
markets in countries where they do not
have to pay a minimum wage or can
legally hire children.
They can exploit speculative stock
trading to wreck markets while bringing
home the bacon.
They can reorganize themselves into
gargantuan mergers and cut costs by
cutting thousands of jobs.
In short, until businesses realize that
their bottom line is not the true bottom
line, corporate boards will continue to
cow-tow to clamorous investors.
Therefore, one way ordinary people
can make a change is through socially
responsible investing.
Whereas many economic advisors
assume their only moral behavior is to
maximize returns for shareholders,
many investors are beginning to show
they have complex goals and are not
willing to sacrifice their personal values
before a golden calf.
By investing in companies concerned
with environmental protection, labor
rights and social well being, investors
can build portfolios that will force com
panies to a higher level of moral re
sponsibility.
Hazel Henderson, an advisor for
Calvert Social Investment Funds, said “it
is possible to go much farther, to change
today’s global economic warfare into a
win-win game in which most ethical
countries and companies can succeed.
“In the largest planetary context, all
our individual self-interests are con
verging toward the evolution of healthy
human societies within nature’s ecolog
ical capacity. With longer time horizons
in view, earth ethics and human morali
ty simply become pragmatic.”
Although many American companies
are leading the way to this economic or
der with a human face, the United
States still has a long way to go.
Politicians still chant the mantra of
economic growth as if limitless wealth
is inherently desirable.
Companies still lay off hundreds of
employees with hardly a second thought.
And meanwhile, a growing division
between rags and riches in this country
desperately needs attention.
To combat these problems, com
merce must be more stringently tem
pered by morality. People must be prior
itized above profits.
Eugene V. Debs, a monumental fig
ure in American labor history, once
said, “Money constitutes no proper ba
sis for civilization.”
Truly, it as the apostle Paul wrote,
“The love of money is a root of all kinds
of evil.”
Caleb McDaniel is a sophomore
history major.
iV*
'eople should be aware of audience lest misunderstandings occur
o man is
an island
unto him-
.” Each action a
son takes either
?ctly or indirectly
lets other people,
one in America
a in a glass bub-
Demond
REID
II
323
David Howard, the
id of Washington D.C.’s mayor con-
uent-service, should have taken this
a into consideration before he used
word “niggardly” in a speech. In
,.j > age of political correctness Howard
leP'iuld have known better.
'Howard used the word, which means
erly or stingy, to describe his depart-
ntls funds.
But surprise, surprise, surprise the
rdlwas mistaken for the similar-
inding racial slur.
1.5-0569
;ifi£DS
Before Howard could apologize, the
train of public gossip was already in
motion and the unintended offense rail
roaded him straight into Resigna-
tionville.
After the press reported the incident,
Howard was tagged the worst racist
since Archie Bunker.
However, Howard did not deserve to
be forced into resignation.
He deserved noogies and an atomic
wedgie for being such an oblivious idiot
not to recognize the sheer mayhem that
one word could cause.
Howard was stricken with a severe
case of intelligent ignorance. It is great
that he is smart enough to use “niggard
ly” in its proper context, but it is sad
that he was not smart enough to not
use the word.
Howard seemed unaware of the time
and place he is living in. Washington
D.C. has a dense black population.
How could he not even consider the
word might be misunderstood by the
constituents? These are the same people
who reelected Marion Barry after he
was caught with a prostitute smoking
crack.
Communication is not only what is
being said, but also how that informa
tion is understood. Howard failed to
take into account his audience.
If any normal person had to make a
speech in front of the National Organi
zation of Women, it is doubtful that
they would use the word cunniculous,
even though that word is not misogy-
nistic in meaning.
Using those words would show an
extensive knowledge of words but an
intense ignorance of people.
If a person had to make a speech in
front of the League of United Latin
American Citizens, no matter how
damp their posterior region became.
they would not dare to utter the phrase
“wet back.” Why? Because the racial
climate in this country has gotten more
tense than a disgruntled postal worker
going through nicotine withdrawal.
Some may blame political correct
ness, instead of Howard, for the situa
tion. However, political correctness,
much like the Internal Revenue Service,
is a necessary evil this country needs to
publicly protect some groups from un
necessary ridicule.
Without political correctness blacks
would be portrayed as criminals in the
media. Native Americans would be
used as mascots for professional sport
teams and Pat Robertson would be able
to damn all homosexuals to hell.
Howard is nothing more than a sacri
ficial lamb to the great god of political
correctness, but he has nobody to
blame for his situation but himself.
There were many other words he
could have used. But for some uncom-
prehensible reason he chose the one
word that could offend a large portion
of the city.
He might have been able to get away
with using “niggardly” in Minnesota,
where the only black people there play
for the Vikings, but not in Washington
D.C. where a large portion of the popu
lation would be offended.
He had a position of influence but
failed his responsibility to always con
sider the people who has hired to repre
sent.
Howard should have taken the ad
vice given by Jesus in the Bible when
he said, “With great power comes great
responsibility.” No wait that was not
said by Jesus in the Bible, that was said
by Peter Parker in Spiderman.
Demand Reid is a sophomore
marketing major.