To the Editor

 Uncategorized
Nov 072006
 
Authors:

Real reasons young voters are apathetic

I am writing this letter in response to Ms. Davis’s Friday article “Fine, don’t vote – see if I care.” Because Ms. Davis seems unwilling or unable to explain why young voters are apathetic to elections, I’ve taken it upon myself to offer a few obvious reasons.

First, I have not witnessed one positive campaign ad be it from Representative Musgrave or State Representative Paccione. On public TV, our two likely congressional leaders have only made use the the ad-hominem attack in support of their candidacy. That’s not the type of behavior that inspires political participation or demonstrates leadership. Personally, it disgusts me.

Second, the current re-election rate for incumbents is 98%. In recent history only 2% of challengers have actually overtaken their congressional incumbents. This is most likely because of gerrymandered districts and disproportional campaign finances, all of which have nothing to do with voters.

Third, the two-party political system within the US does not adequately represent many voters. For example, if you prefer less government in the economy and your personal life, what party will best represent your views? On average, neither the Republicans nor Democrats will provide adequate representation.

And finally, many young voters have a tough time dealing with the legalese style of ballot proposals. How many voters actually understand the current citizen initiative system in Colorado or how state Supreme Court justices earn their position before voting on an some altercation of the process?

Ms. Davis, please consider that there are valid reasons to avoid voting before castigating such a large crowd of voters. This demographic which you have so flippantly demeaned might be a tad bit more knowledgeable than you portray.

Eric Olsen

2nd Bachelor’s Candidate

Political Science

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.

To the Editor

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 072006
 
Authors:

So here’s the other side.

Mr. Sides presents an interesting (albeit misinformed) viewpoint regarding the issue of abortion, but I would like to point out a few issues he has failed, it seems, to take into consideration.

First off, he seems to believe that science reigned supreme as “absolute truth” following the musings of Descartes. I would press Mr. Sides to find a credible scientist that regards his or her own work as absolute truth; one of the foundations of scientific thought is the responsibility of science, as an institution, to question everything. This is why concepts such as gravity, relativity, and yes, even evolution, are labeled theories, not truths. They are not proven beyond all shadow of a doubt; they are merely observed consistencies. Furthermore, all scientific ideas and principles are in a constant state of scrutiny, revision, and clarification as we learn more about the universe we live in; a far cry from anything absolute, in my humble opinion.

So yes, living one’s life in accordance with scientific principles is living with faith; faith that one’s own sensory experiences aren’t deceiving and can be explained by observing the physical world around us. The important issue here is the ability to choose which type of faith you have: faith in science, or faith in a spiritual practice. Mr. Sides has made it clear which type of faith he has chosen; perhaps, in illuminating my point, I have as well.

Regardless, neither of us should be subject to hate or discrimination because of our choices. We should have the freedom to choose how we live our lives, in the same way women should have the freedom to choose what happens to their bodies. It seems that Mr. Sides takes his ability to choose for granted, as many of us white males do.

My only consolation to Mr. Sides is that the abortion choice is one he will never have to make. He will never be impregnated by a rapist, for example; he will never have to face the terrifying option of either birthing a child he does not want and/or can’t support, or aborting an unborn fetus and facing the scorn of people who do not understand his situation. Mr. Sides should nap easily with the knowledge that he will never have to face the “bleak, cynical” life that many women face on a daily basis when they are placed in situations beyond their control. Because it is when someone else does your choosing for you (someone like Adolf Hitler or Margaret Sanger, for example) that real problems arise.

Ryan Polich

Senior

Fine Arts

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the Editor

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 072006
 
Authors:

OK, I’ll say it. The problem with the CSU Ram Football team is the coaches. After more than 50 years of playing and watching football is it abundantly clear to me and many others that a major coaching change is needed to revive a dying football team.

The offensive line play is miserable and it is apparent they can neither run block or pass protect. Funk must be replaced. Special teams are anything but special and obviously a new approach is needed. The defense is OK against nothing teams but ineffective under pressure or against good teams. There is no pass rush and defending the pass is basically a failure. Here too, a new direction is needed.

And here is the most glaring problem facing the Rams: an offensive coordinator who is predictable, uncreative, unimaginative and unable to learn from experience. This is evident to anyone familiar with football with the notable exception of Sonny Lubick. The last drive against New Mexico says it all. With 1st and 10 the play call is wide receiver screen. This excessively used play is known by all defenses playing the Rams and moreover it gained nothing in the 3 previous attempts. Result: NO GAIN. Now it’s 2nd and long. So what play is called for a team which is among the worst rushing teams in the nation and on this day was averaging 2 yards per carry? A pathetic undisguised run. Result: NO GAIN. Third and long and the need for a 1st down is critical. Is a pass in the middle which was successful all day called? No, they run a long pass down the sideline which had been defended well all day. Result: INCOMPLETE and the rest is history. The defense can’t hold and another loss for the Rams is in the books.

Unfortunately, these problems are chronic and longstanding. If Sonny Lubick can’t see it then he needs to go too.

Dennis Abrams

Rams Football season ticket holder

 Posted by at 5:00 pm

To the Editor

 Uncategorized  Add comments
Nov 072006
 
Authors:

In response to Friday’s staff editorial urging a vote of “No” on Amendment 42 (minimum wage increase): Who wrote this abominable piece? In it, the editorial staff criticized a minimum wage increase by claiming that wage increases should really go along with increased worker skill. Really. Answer this, Collegian Editorial Staff: do people need to increase their skills every year before they’re charged more for basic goods and services (like food, shelter, and transportation)? Ever heard of inflation? If the minimum wage is not increased, then every year the most vulnerable segment of the population (you know, the 13% of Americans who live below the poverty line) is less and less able to feed, clothe, and house their families.

Look, an employee making minimum wage working 40 hr weeks for the entire year makes under $11,000. The $1.70 increase mandated by Amendment 42 would bring that to just over $14,000. Annual income. The current poverty line as defined by the Department of Health and Human Services for a family of 4 is an income of $20,000 a year. Think about that. Amendment 42’s increase won’t even bring a family of 4 with one parent employed at minimum wage within $5,000 dollars of the poverty line. (And don’t forget that health insurance isn’t even in this picture).

Will this harm small businesses? I don’t know the numbers, but ask yourself: who’s paying minimum wage? I’m betting the vast majority of employees at minimum wage work for the big chains – McDonald’s, Taco Bell, Wal-Mart. Are we really going to safeguard the profits of these mega-corporations at the expense of Coloradoans living near or below the poverty line? Is that the kind of America you want to live in? Vote yes on 42, for goodness’ sake.

Joe Fass

postdoc in Biochemistry, 2003-5

 Posted by at 5:00 pm