Make a change
Voice opinions at UCR forum

Have you ever sat in a class completely and utterly bored, unable to retain any of the information being presented as you try to figure out just why you’re required to take a lab science when you’re an English major, or why you must pass a sociology class when you’re a math major?

Have you ever wanted to know who decided what subjects should be included in the University’s Curriculum Requirements?

Have you ever wondered why no one asked your opinion?

Well, wonder no more.

The Faculty Senate and the Student Government Association are sponsoring an open forum to discuss what changes should be made to the University Curriculum Requirements at 7 p.m. today in the Student Center Ballroom. Recommendations from the forum will be submitted to the Office of the Provost.

All students are invited to attend.

If you’ve ever felt like your classes lacked depth, interest or relevance, now is the time to speak up.

Your suggestions may not impact you directly, as the changes will probably take some time to implement; they have the potential to have a long-lasting impact on the university — your university.

This forum should be taken seriously. It shouldn’t be viewed as the chance to point fingers at teachers you didn’t like or make silly and unrealistic suggestions.

Instead, it should be a place where students and administration can come together and have open discussion about issues that affect them both.

“I’ve been told that this is the biggest academic endeavor at TCU in the last 20 years,” said Brian Casebolt, chairman of academic affairs for House of Student Representatives.

Truly, chances like these don’t come along very often..

Discussing the presidential election with a fellow TCU student just the other day, I was discouraged to learn that he would not be voting in the upcoming elections. Why? Well, he simply did not have confidence enough in any of the candidates to vote.

As I thought about this, I realized that by not voting he wasn’t doing nothing, but in fact was making an even bigger political statement than someone who will vote for Al Gore, George W. Bush, Pat Buchanan, Ralph Nader or Harry Browne. For this reason, I have great respect for him.

Unfortunately, by not voting, he is failing in what so many of his fellow Americans will fail in Tuesday: their civic responsibility.

You’ve heard it over and over again since before you even turned 18: you have a civic responsibility to this country to participate in elections.

It is certainly easy to understand that many Americans are frustrated with the presidential election; the candidates certainly aren’t the strongest their parties have ever nominated. Nonetheless, one of them will be running this country for the next four years and if you want one of them running it, vote for him. If you’re indifferent, don’t vote for a president. But by all means, don’t think that not voting for president is a reason to not go to the polls.

Too often, presidential elections overshadow the other, arguably more important elections of a citizen’s community.

For instance, in Tarrant County, two veteran police officers are vying for sheriff; District 12 voters may elect a Libertarian to Congress who promises to make it a priority to eliminate the Education Department; Incumbent Kay Bailey Hutchinson seeks re-election as a state senator; and the Texas Railroad Commission will present six candidates on the ballot this election.

Then again, maybe you aren’t overlooking these important offices. Maybe you plan on voting a straight ticket, after all, that would benefit the goal of your party controlling the White House and Congress.

The only problem is, you will likely run into some difficult choices if you are a Democrat when you see that the Texas Supreme Court nominations fail to include any members of your party.

These are just some examples of the important races that are up for grabs Tuesday and it is essential to the success of this community that you research the candidates and vote your conscience.

There is no electoral college standing between you and your state representatives or Texas Supreme Court justices. There is only your vote.

So take some time this weekend to do a little research and make your vote count. For many of you, this is likely the first election that you will participate in. It is your turn to participate in your government.
Don’t let this chance pass you by.

James Zwilling is a sophomore news-editorial journalism major from Phoenix. He can be reached at (james_zwilling@usa.net).

I think a more telling way of examining a society is to not look at what the majority of the population adheres to, but at what that majority considers radical or extreme.

The presidential election is perhaps the best platform right now for such a methodological examination. Consider that the two major candidates are only marginally different. Both believe that cannabis should remain illegal and its use merits time in prison.

They aren’t going to raise the minimum wage to a fair level or maintain a foreign trade policy that insists upon basic human rights for people such as a 6-year-old Burmese who made the Old Navy tech vests that are now stuffed in the back of your closets.

Neither is going to actually make any progress in the areas of gay, female or minority rights. And both are going to build more prisons instead of rehabilitation centers, more B-12s than public schools, more wealth for the wealthy than equality for the poor.

Then there are the “third-party” candidates, whose ideas and political platforms are supposedly so radical that they can only hope to muster one or two percent of the popular vote.

Case in point: Harry Browne, the Libertarian Party candidate for president. Browne wants to eliminate Social Security, perhaps the most inane and burdensome program ever created by our government.

More importantly, he wants to end prohibition and the failed and unconstitutional “War On Drugs.”

rowne said on his first day in office he would grant executive pardons to every person currently in prison for a non-violent federal drug offense.

Essentially, Browne wants to drastically reduce the size of government to reflect the outline of the Constitution, which sounds perfectly logical to me.

A better case in point: Ralph Nader, the Green Party candidate for president. The center of Nader’s whole campaign is riding on the American politics of corporate influence. Nader is fully prepared to stop money-driven policy making.

Poll after poll shows that the American people favor campaign finance reform, that they think corporations have too much influence over politicians and that they don’t trust politicians.

Well, here’s Ralph, the man who created consumer advocacy, the man who doesn’t own a car out of moral protest, the man who eats at the same restaurant five days a week because he gets the sixth meal free. Tell me this guy’s not the candidate you’ve been looking for!

A couple weeks ago, an alarming personal revelation happened to me at the Laundromat. As I was waiting for my clothes to dry, among all of the other poor people for whom George W. Bush has so much compassion, I realized that, based on my personal philosophy, I’ve been relegated to the fringe. I’m an absolute radical because of the labels that could be attached to me: vegan, feminist, humanist.

I refuse to eat animals. There are several reasons not to, and the only reason anybody can offer in favor of eating animals is that they taste good. So does a bagel, but a bagel doesn’t leave the aftertaste of animal cruelty, environmental ruin or economic injustice like a nice bloody steak.

I don’t believe in adhering to traditional gender roles. If a male wants to wear a skirt, society shouldn’t teach that he can’t. If a woman wants to hock a loogie, society shouldn’t teach that she can’t.

Regardless of anatomy, human beings are individuals, and generalizations, limitations or expectations shouldn’t be applied based on arbitrary notions.

I detest that I can’t find a fashionable, affordable pair of shoes that wasn’t made in a sweatshop or with animal parts.

I try desperately to only buy products manufactured in countries with human-rights laws protecting workers. Look at your tags; know that you’re wearing some 9-year-old’s 12-cents-an-hour labor. It doesn’t make you sexy.

These personal philosophies alone are enough to brand me a radical in our society. We won’t even mention my atheism, which practically buys me a ticket to the moon. But ask yourself what kind of society you live in when someone guided by a desire to not hurt others, or support the hurting of others, is the exception and not the rule.

Kelly O'Rourke is a columnist for the Daily Lobo at the University of New Mexico. This column was distributed by U-WIRE.