Diary of a Young Conservative
Dear Editor:
Several points about affirmative action:
Some people argue that the benefactors of affirmative action are”qualified.” They say that those who benefit fromaffirmative action have sufficient “merit.” Withinthese statements is a direct implication that the applicants needno further help to be accepted by the college of their choice. Ifthis is the case, why use affirmative action at all?
Secondly, why is affirmative action such a controversial issue?If they were merely bumping up these applicants from “barelycould get in” to “definitely accepted by [substituteuniversity of your choice]” then no one would care because noone would lose their spot based on their race. This, however, isnot the case. We do not live in a fantasy world where everyone isaccepted by the university of their choice. There are a fixednumber of spots, and every person who unjustly benefits fromaffirmative action costs a qualified applicant a spot. Affirmativeaction does not aid those who are qualified; if they were asqualified as affirmative action proponents claim, affirmativeaction would not be “necessary” to help them intocollege.
I have yet to hear a logical argument about “making up forpast discriminations.” It is indisputable that there was muchdiscrimination in the past, and that continues to a certain extenttoday. However, I find that nearly every argument about pastdiscrimination comes filled with ethos (emotional appeals) ratherthan logos (logical consistency). Most of what I hear is about”The Hanging Tree” and events that happened in thedistant past. A man once said something to the effect of “Letnot the burdens of the father be carried over to the son.” Inother words, we cannot change the offensive actions of ourancestors, so do not place the blame and responsibility on us. Afriend of mine, Kyle Snyder, makes a great point: Not one personalive today owned a slave or was a slave (within the UnitedStates). By using affirmative action today, we “make upfor” those past discriminations that are in no way ourresponsibility.
With regards to Jasper, there is an important lesson. Decadesago, that heinous crime would have gone completely unnoticed. Infact, it would have been applauded in some cases. Today, weimmediately identify those evil men who dragged around and murderedMr. Byrd as “criminal”, and rightfully so.
I want someone to try to show me a specific unqualified whiteperson who has been admitted over a qualified minority. Then, tryto prove to me that discrimination is the cause of this decision.Only then will it become evident to everyone how hard it is toprove that there is rampant discrimination within the collegeadmissions process.
It is important now to realize the double standard.Discrimination that benefits the white man is labeled as”racist” by pro-affirmative action liberals.Discrimination that benefits minorities is called”affirmative action.”
Reed Hanson
Member of the Young Conservatives of Texas
Response to “No books for you”: Exactly Whatstands in the way of 24 hour access to research materials?
In response to The Daily Campus editorial of 10/7, “Nobooks for you”, I would like to praise the Editorial Boardfor expressing its desire that SMU’s libraries expand theirprovision of appropriate, available and secure studyfacilities.
I am proud of the fact that the Fondren Library Center managesto provide 116 hours a week during the regular semester forstudents to study, with 24-hour study provided before and duringexam periods. A comparison with peer and benchmark institutionsshows that we are competitive with most of them. We also try toaccommodate study needs for some of the University’s officialholidays by opening on the day after Thanksgiving and Martin LutherKing Day – a volunteer assignment on the part of ourstaff.
Coincidentally, the CUL management team was discussing this veryissue as the newspapers were being deposited at our doors. We relyheavily upon our student workers to staff the later hours andholidays. Our budgeted funds have never been sufficient to meet ourongoing needs (FY 2003 expenditures were $355,000 with a shortfallof $165,000). The Faculty Senate passed a resolution last yearrequesting that the administration increase our budget by $150,000to meet this deficit. Although the administration is sympathetic toour needs, we have not yet received any additional funding.
I also need to point out that, with the current configuration ofthe FLC Complex, providing a secure area without access toCirculation, Reference and Computing Services is not feasible.Additional staff members beyond security personnel are needed toservice the Fondren Library Center Complex – an area of265,000 square feet. There are plans to provide a 24-hour studyfacility as part of a building upgrade some years down the road,but not in the immediate future.
I appreciate the Editorial Board’s efforts to bring thisissue to the attention of The Daily Campus readers. I am delightedto be able to count you among our supporters as we continue to pushfor additional student worker funding to meet your study andinformation needs.
Sincerely,
Gillian M. McCombs
Dean and Director, Central University [email protected]
(214) 768-2400
Our “No books for you” critic: Can ED Board doanything but complain?
To the Editor:
The Oct. 7th editorial titled “No books for you” istypical Ed Board. Last year, I read countless articles and Ed Boardeditorials about how we so desperately needed a new rec center onpar with other similar schools.
Now that we have one about to be constructed, the Ed Boarddecides to complain about it. If there is such a desperate need tospend money on more study locations, why wasn’t somethingsaid before? Can you do anything but complain?
Cory Plunk
Junior electrical engineering/physics major
