Editor:
One of the foundations of our country that I am most proud of is that we are allowed freedom of speech and freedom of thought. Some students at UCSD are in full support of our government’s current actions and some are not. It was incredibly astute of the A.S. Council to realize this and work to pass a resolution that is not partisan in giving its unconditional support for the victims of Sept. 11, 2001.
The intent behind changes to the resolution was to embrace the diversity of opinion of UCSD students. Regardless of politics, the one thing on which we all agree is that we give our love and support to those who are fighting and to those who died in the tragedy of Sept. 11. In this resolution, we promise the men and women who died that they did not do so in vain and that we will never forget the lessons we have learned. The resolution is not a “”waste of paper,”” but rather a heartfelt condolence and support for American victims.
The original version of the resolution did not serve the interests of the student body. After taking a vote among the senators who would pass it in its original form, it was clear that the resolution would not pass, because it did not serve to unite us.
I am proud of the A.S. Council for being so attuned to the student body and making the changes necessary to better serve all students. To say that any member of the A.S. Council is un-American because we sought to unify our campus in supporting Americans who died and who are fighting is both hypocritical and divisive. It is hypocritical to say that one supports America and unity in the country, and then to rip apart one’s fellow students, who are doing everything they can to support the causes of unity and pride.
When I ran for office on the Unity slate, I meant every word that I said. I promised that I would do everything in my power to unite the student body under the causes that we care about. As a leader on the A.S. Council, I promote unity in every possible way. The amended resolution was a good-faith effort to unite the campus.
As a student, I am proud that our student government takes all sides into account. I am proud that our student government cares about all students on our campus and works every day to represent as many interests as possible. I am proud that our student government, while facing the political ambition of partisan groups, strives to do what is best for the campus.
— Jenn Brown
A.S. Vice President Internal
Don’t recoup housing’s financial setbacks at students’ expense
Editor:
I was reading over some of the benefits of the “”one contract, one rate”” meal plan. Besides the fact that many statements were repeats of old statements with only a few words changed around, many of them were simply offensive and inflammatory.
A couple of ideas that were particularly offensive to me ran along the lines of, “”Freshmen are not ready for the responsibility of living in an apartment atmosphere,”” and “”Mandatory meal plans are good for freshmen because they cannot cook for themselves.””
The plan went along to mention how ramen noodles and the like were not nutritionally sound meals. I must agree, but the last time I checked, pizza, cheeseburgers and french fries — to name a few of the items served regularly at all dining halls on campus — are not too healthy, either.
I am a freshmen who got placed in an apartment this year, and I couldn’t consider myself more lucky. My roommates and I delegate chores, cook nutritious meals on a regular basis and are overall generally happy, as well as about $3,000 richer.
As for the comment that most freshmen aren’t ready for the responsibility of living on their own, I say: What the hell are they doing in college? The entire point of college, for a lot of people, is learning to be independent. A lot of freshmen aren’t ready for the responsibility of midterms, finals and bills, but that doesn’t stop the university from administering them.
Why is it necessary for UCSD to become increasingly paternal? I moved away from home to escape parents, not to replace them with much more expensive ones.
When I asked representatives why this plan was necessary, I was told that UCSD needs more funds to build housing, that apartment funds can only be used to build apartments, and so on.
It was a mediocre explanation at best. Then I questioned the representatives on why UCSD continued to admit more and more students when it was obvious that there were building shortages. I was told that the governor was responsible for setting admission quotas.
How is it that all of these bureaucracies can exist and not be in working contact with one another? The idea that I pay almost $14,000 a year to help support a system that is completely out of sync with itself and lacking any type of checks or balances sickens me.
I don’t receive any type of financial assistance, and I know a lot of people that are in the same situation. That means every dollar I give to this school had to be earned by my family and me.
I have a proposal of my own: What if UCSD charges students according to how much their living arrangement costs the university?
And as for mandatory meal plans, I think vegetarians would have a hard time spending $1,800 without resorting to salad for every meal.
I have to work hard to afford this place, and all the wasted money that seems to be floating around (can we say “”New Student Initiated Outreach and Recruitment?””) seriously makes me reconsider going to a private university. You know, the ones with four-year housing guarantees.
— Emilee Cunningham
UCSD freshman