| Danger on Ice TCU students finally got their white Christmas last week. Layers of ice were frozen on car windshields and on roads, making driving conditions slippery at best. Winter arrived in Fort Worth and took everyone by surprise, including TCU administrators. While many school districts around the Dallas/Fort Worth area closed their doors for the day, TCU went on with business as usual. Students had to slip and slide to class on icy sidewalks. Classes were finally canceled at 4 p.m. However, by then, many students had already braved the weather and dangerous roadways to come to class. By late afternoon, the campus was desolate. Classes should have been let out at much earlier than 4 p.m., but TCU failed to inform students how to check to see if school was canceled. Other schools have a specific phone number which is updated hourly in bad weather situations, and students can call to see if classes are canceled. Furman University in Greenville, S.C., for example, has informed all students of this number in case of bad weather. Many TCU students were left wondering who to contact to find out if classes were canceled. TCU needs to take the responsibility for directly transmitting this information to students. Kelli Horst, TCU's director of communications, said students can call the switchboard at 257-7000 to find out if classes are canceled. But how many students knew to call that number? TCU needs a separate number just for weather emergencies, and if this number is ever going to be used, the university must publicize it. TCU students need to be notified in a timely manner in case of bad weather. Students should not have to risk their lives to get to class.
SGA still needs improvements Last semester was a tough one for me. I had to give up one of my favorite activities - being a Skiff columnist - in order to join the group of leaders that, I thought, were shaping TCU's future: the Student Government Association. I gained lots of insight from attending SGA meetings. I learned about projects that had been undertaken by students in the past and those that just now are coming to fruition. I learned that each of those projects which we now enjoy had an ancestor in the work of past representatives to the SGA. In other words, the SGA can do things. It might take a while, but they can. In addition, I learned that we owe much thanks to the last president, Ben Alexander, and his team, who brought SGA out of the Dark Ages to give us an improved Web site, online elections and campus-wide e-mail announcements. Last year's initiatives also included a further strive toward diversity and unity in the TCU community. What I'm trying to say is that SGA did a good job last year, and Ben Jenkins has a team with the potential to do even more right now. Nevertheless, there is always room for improvement. Thus, even though I have left my role as a representative in SGA to seek my solitary column, I want to offer some insight to this semester's reps and to the students of TCU. 1) SGA works on a model where reps are elected from their residence hall or from off campus. This model has worked in the past. However, it also has several flaws. For example, the number of seats available for town representatives (commuter students) is never filled. Although around 60 percent of students live off campus, their interests are always underrepresented. This problem needs a solution, or else commuter students are never going to have that parking lot they desire. In addition, the model of reps by residence hall hinders SGA from discussing many issues, such as improvements of technology, academic curriculum and financial aid at TCU. It is hard for a rep to raise these issues when they are fighting for the interests of a resident, not a student. The SGA needs to implement a system in which the different colleges can voice their concerns. Perhaps each college should have a number of reps to the SGA who can raise issues from our much-neglected academic standpoint. 2) In addition, if SGA wants to promote diversity and attract minorities to its seats, it needs to make a greater effort to reach out to them, to make activities that attract their interest, or at least attempt to be more inclusive. Often times, SGA sends mixed messages to minorities about their role and importance in the university. For example, last year a resolution that objected the change of the term "freshman" to "first-year student" was killed because the SGA believed that it was important for TCU women to feel included in every way possible. However, by the same token, last year several reps belonging to minority religions had to start every SGA meeting with an emotional slap in the face because the chaplain would always end the opening prayer with "in Jesus Christ's name we pray." No, dear chaplain, we don't all pray in the name of Jesus Christ. 3) SGA should also have its meetings in a more visible and spacious place. There were hardly enough seats for every rep at meetings last year, leaving no space for plain ol' students interested in attending a meeting. SGA also needs some time to have an "open mic" for students to voice their concerns, so that the interests of the students remain a concern not only during campaign time, but throughout the whole semester. To achieve this, reps must realize that they made a commitment to be there every Tuesday from 5 until 7 p.m., not from 5 p.m. until as-soon-as-I-can-get-the-Hell-out-of-here. And finally, and most importantly, TCU students need to begin to hold their representatives accountable for their decisions. Read the Skiff's House briefs, freeze the SGA computer with e-mails, complain or praise. It doesn't' matter - just do it. This year, the SGA is starting with an awesome team that is willing to work hard. But it all won't work out as long as we students avoid what we have to do: bitch. Thus, I explain my resignation now. I am leaving SGA, not because I don't want to participate with the improvements of the university but because I am going to be playing the most important role I can think of: I will be a constituent. SGA, my pen and I are going to be watching you like a hawk.
Raquel Torres is a sophomore business major
from Cali, Colombia. Education is the key to understanding Does the Confederate battle flag flying over the South Carolina Statehouse represent heritage or hatred? It is difficult for anyone who has never lived in the South to realize how much pride people have in their traditions and gentility. There is also animosity toward minorities. The South is different in its customs and its attitudes. Old cultures die hard. Southern historian B.D. Patterson said the flag flown in South Carolina is not one normally flown over a building. In a recent Fort Worth Star-Telegram column, he said the flag flown in South Carolina is the type usually carried by military troops in battle. Flying the Confederate battle flag in the South keeps distasteful memories alive and can cause other hate crimes to occur. The flag has become a symbol of bigotry and causes many people to resent it. The flag represents hostility toward people of color. Old wounds do not heal. Because of the reputation, it is time for South Carolina to take this flag down. Is there still bigotry in the United States? Yes. Since 1971, the Southern Poverty Law Center has monitored hate crimes through its Klanwatch and leads the fight against civil injustice. Today it keeps tabs on more than 500 white supremacists, anti-government and other hate groups in the United States. In Texas, Klanwatch monitors 18 groups, including the Knights of the White Kamellia and World Church of the Creator in Austin, the National Alliance and United Knights of the Ku Klux Klan and National Alliance in Fort Worth and the Texas Aryan Nationalist Skinheads in Baytown. The monitoring task forces provide updates to law enforcement agencies and the news media. The SPLC issues a quarterly publication, "Intelligence Report," to disseminate its findings to the general public. What is it about human beings that causes us to be hateful? Certainly we are not born that way. It seems that in the United States, there is always some group to hate. Some folks hate blacks. Some people hate the Jewish community. Some people hate women. It seems as if we are always trying to get in touch with our inner racist. Education is the key. The most productive work of the SPLC is educating young people in a national tolerance education program. More than 77,000 schools in the United States are using the Teaching Tolerance program that originated from the SPLC. President Clinton's Initiative on Race has singled out this program as a great tool to teach elementary school children how to get along with each other. If Americans are going to learn tolerance, there is going to have to be a change of attitude and a change of heart. People can become educated about each other's culture. We can open our eyes to the fact that none of us is exactly like any other person. Today would be a good day to understand and learn to accept each other.
David Becker is a Brite Divinity School
graduate student from Pueblo, Colo. Facts about genetically modified foods present dilemma over its usefulness Genetically modified foods have the potential to eliminate world hunger, fight disease and vastly improve general human health, all while making agriculture more sustainable and decreasing the use of harmful chemicals such as insecticides. However, these products may have the capacity to trigger an environmental catastrophe of incalculable magnitude. The question today facing humanity is: Are we willing to gamble with Mother Nature? In order to answer this question, we must first analyze the facts about recombinant DNA technology and genetically modified foods. Unfortunately, depending on whom you talk to, the facts can be inconsistent and misleading. If you talk to the corporations that would profit from the technology, you would be told that genetically modified foods are just as safe as those produced by traditional methods. If you talk to certain consumer advocate groups, you would be informed of the dangers of "Frankenfoods," and the approaching economic catastrophe. As usual, the truth is somewhere between these extremes. There are, however, some facts about genetically modified foods that should be known to every person. Fact: The majority of those in opposition to genetically modified foods do not know enough about the science behind the technology to understand just how safe these products are. Fact: Genetic manipulation of agriculture is nothing new. In fact, farmers since ancient times have engineered genetically superior crops by selecting seeds from those plants that were resistant to disease and hybridizing them with other strains of the plant. Fact: Many of the foods that we today consider "natural" are actually the result of thorough genetic manipulation. Corn, wheat and many fruits are examples of foods that were not available to humans in their present forms before this century. Fact: Modern recombinant DNA technology allows scientists to significantly increase the speed and precision of the process of genetic manipulation. A scientist can now identify a gene that codes for a single desirable characteristic, cut it out and insert that gene into a recipient, which will then display the desired characteristic. Fact: Genes are not as simple as they were once thought to be. Genes function through complex interactions, with one gene regulating the expression of others, and it is possible that a genetic insert could interfere with these interactions and lead to consequences that are not predictable. This presents a problem for researchers attempting to develop new foods through genetic recombination. Fact: According to the World Health Organization, 230 million children are at risk for malnutrition due to vitamin A deficiency in regions where rice is a major component of the diet. An article in a recent issue of the journal Science explains how scientists have used recombinant DNA technology to create a strain of rice which contains enough vitamin A to supplement the deficiency in the average person's diet. These scientists developed this rice without commercial support so that they could give the seeds to farmers free of charge and without dealing with patent laws or licensing restrictions. The fact is, there are risks involved with this technology. So, if recombinant DNA technology could alleviate the suffering of 230 million children, is it worth the risk? Is humankind ready to gamble with Mother Nature? The stakes are high - ante up.
Zachary Norris is a senior biology major
from Long Beach, Calif. |
The TCU Daily Skiff © 1998, 1999 Credits |