Education, not business, is first
Several proposals have been made recently that would limit admissions for UCLA students based on their state residency status, failing to recognize the mission of the university.
Students are not walking price tags, corrupting unbiased academic advancement with fiscal interests. Rather than being viewed as the products of a prestigious university, UCLA students are considered investments by people worried about state cuts.
While Californians have invested in the University of California, and while it is we the students and our families who carry the burden of paying student fees, some are considering increasing that burden. We should not sell out the principles of a public institution or the California students just to get a buyout from out-of-state students.
Not only have student fees increased 100 percent since 2001, now local, qualified and eligible students are facing possible rejection in favor of increased out-of-state enrollment. Again students are being forced to carry the burden of increased shortfalls in funding by the state of California.
Rather than re-evaluating the state’s relationship with its public institutions and considering fiscal readjustments within this institution, authorities on campus are again using the students and the future of California as scapegoats. It is contradictory to argue that taxpayers are not a body we are accountable to, but to then fully depend on the taxpayers as the only consistent form of funding. Taxpayers and the people of California are the only reliable, consistent supporters of these institutions, and as such, UCLA is responsible to the public that funds it.
This is not a private university, and particular groups should not be prioritized because of their financial advantage over those who are less fortunate. We have just established holistic review, a new policy adopted to ensure that all aspects of a candidate are being considered in the application process, and already it is being threatened.
If the UC is adulterating the meaning of education without a long-term proposal, then educational quality as well as the stature of UCLA will eventually be compromised by this strictly business attitude. Perhaps this business mentality is the root of the problem; the institution itself needs to solve its fiscal problems by working with the state and lobbying representatives.
Just because the state’s budget does not seem to prioritize education does not mean that the university should not prioritize its goal and service to the public. We should refocus on priorities, not price tags.
Homaira Hosseini
USAC president
Former chair, Student Fee Advisory Committee
Jesse Melgar
USAC external vice president
Chairman, University of California Student Association
Norah Sarsour
Student representative, Chancellor’s Enrollment Advisory Committee
Former Access coordinator, Student Initiated Access Center
Columnist’s claims lack factual foundation
Even an opinion needs to stand upon a firm foundation. Alexander Pherson says that President George W. Bush’s actions are “only necessary” (“Obama should make change cautiously,” Nov. 13).
Necessary for what, exactly? He goes on to say that our death count in Iraq “pales in comparison to all of our other wars.” So does that mean it’s OK that we’ve lost 4,130 Americans, with more than 30,000 injured?
What if it was his own death or injury? Or his brother’s? We are told President-elect Barack Obama’s words are “claptrap” and that former President Jimmy Carter was “slipshod,” but we are not told the reasons why, whereas, Bush’s actions are “noble.” Reams of intelligence have revealed that Bush and Vice President Dick Cheney had less than noble reasons for lying to Congress and waging a pre-emptive war.
I respectfully suggest writers think and read extensively before speaking. Yes, there are two sides to every situation, and Pherson does gives us his side ““ but it is an unenlightened one.
Eileen Flaxman
Fourth-year, English
Assistant to the dean of the School of the Arts and Architecture