Newspapers / University of North Carolina … / Nov. 2, 2000, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of University of North Carolina at Asheville Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
Page 2 The Blue Banner nouember2, 2000 Opinions - Jl Coverage of third parties insufficient Kevin Rollins Columnist This year, he members of the Lib ertarian, Reform, Green, Natural Law and Constitution parties, as well as supporters of independents, have been called everything from crazies-on-the-fringe to the destroy ers of America because our votes might cause the “greater of the two evils” to be elected. I don’t see a greater of two evils. I see one evil — the Washington elite that has no interest in democ racy or fair play. Iris an entrenched force that profits from its position, and uses that profit to entrench itself further. It is comprised of the media, government officials, elected politicians and the giant machines of the Republican and Democratic parties. Harry Browne, Pat Buchanan, Ralph Nader, John Hagelin and Howard Philips were branded from the start as insignificant. At the beginning of the year, the media companies surveyed the contend ers and found out that each of these candidates had far less people who planned on voting for them than either the Republican or the Demo crat. Obviously, because they didn’t have any support at the beginning of the year, they couldn’t possibly have more by Election Day. The media scrupulously ignored these candidates. The media made its prediction and used its power to hide these candidates from the view of the American people. They engi neered a self-fulfilling prophecy. Sure, they would occasionally make a reference to the sideshow of Buchanan vs. Nader, but this was mainly to remark on how the pair affected the race between Bush and Gore. Nobody really wants to vote for these guys. They are just voting against the one they like less. And the media has the audacity to tell us that voting for Browne, Buchanan, Nader, Hagelin and Philips is a wasted vote. Endless hours of programming had analysts picking apart the car- bon-copy platforms of Gush and Bore, divining their change in mood from day to day, and remarking on their clothing choices. Coverage of third parties was always subject to being preempted, should the Bush and Gore campaigns make the most insignificant announcements. A Republican or Democrat flunky was always of more interest to the press than a third-party candidate or party convention. The major networks did cover the Reform Party convention. The Re form Party’s raucous fracture and subsequent split was fodder for their preconceived notion that third par ties will never be successful. Appar ently, a successful convention should be totally scripted, involve no party decisions, and have party leaders telling their delegates when to cheer and when to shut up. When it was time for the presi dential debates, exclusion raised its ugly head once again. The Com mission on Presidential Debates set an insurmountable bar that a can didate must have at least 15 percent of the popular support in five se lected polls to be invited. Since the third-party candidates had not been covered by the media, they did not manage to reach this point. No matter how many times the parable ofjesse Ventura and his 10 percent before the" Minnesota debates was told, the Republican-and-Demo- crat-controlled commission kept saying no. “He won,” we would tell them. “Wedon’tcare,” they replied. Ralph Nader wasn’t even allowed to watch. If the third party candidates weren’t threatening, why were Bush and Gore so afraid to debate them? The room temperature of sixty- five degrees was decided upon, and Bush and Gore debated. Without any unexpected challenges or tough questions, the debates were trite little affairs. No real differences were uncovered. Some people decided they hated Bush more and some people decided they hated Gore more. I really like Harry Browne. He represents what I believe. Neither Bush nor Gore comes close. Is it worthwhile to vote for something I don’t want? If you want to see any change in Washington, don’t vote for one of the two Demopublican half-men. A vote for them is an endorsement of the system. It is the acquiescence to all the nonsense that the media has been pouring on us all year long. The status-quo politicians read the polls to find out what they need to support. Please don’t read the polls when it comes to your vote. Vote for what you believe. If you believe Harry Browne or Pat Buchanan is your man, pull the lever for him. If your game is more along the lines of Ralph Nader, John Hagelin or Howard Philips, write in one of them. It doesn’t matter if Ralph Nader’s write-in votes won’t be counted by the State Board of Elections. It doesn’t matter that Buchanan might hurt Bush. It doesn’t matter if Harry Browne disrupts their little elec tion. It is our election. Let’s fight for what we want, not for what they tell us we can have. The Blue Banner welcomes letters and com ments regarding the content or quality of this publication. Letters should be typed, double-spaced, and should not exceed 300 words. Letters for publication should also include the author’s signature, class stand ing and major or other relationship to UNCA. All submissions are subject to editing for length and content. E-mail and web sub missions should contain a telephone number for verification. The deadline for Letters to the Editor is noon on Tuesday. Please send letters to: The Blue Banner, Karpen Hall 244, One University Heights, Asheville, N.C. 28804, submit a letter via the Blue Banner Online, or e-mail banner@unca.edu. Bond referendum needed for North Carolina higher education progress sen student Government Association Ryan Southern SGA columnist Complain, complain, complain— is this what we are all about here at UNCA? Do we just whine and moan about the things that we don’t have and the things that are wrong with our university? You think it’s bad now, but if the Higher Educa tion Improvement Bonds don’t pass on Nov. 7, you haven’t seen any thing yet. This is why passing the bonds are a must for the University of North Carolina system and for UNCA. Many others and I clearly see the need for these bonds to pass to ensure the future of not only our own institution, but the higher- education standard that exempli fies our state’s university system. Yet, time and time again, I have heard misinformed and ignorant responses to the bonds. Selfish com ments like, “Why should I vote for it? I’ll never see anything from it,” have filled my ears more than once. The constraining arms of good po litical conduct and my own moral beliefs have kept these people from getting a big smack. It’s unfortunate that these poorly- informed individuals don’t realize that the facilities that they enjoy now (i.e. Health and Fitness Cen ter, parking deck, etc.) are a result of the foresight of individuals many years ago who saw the importance of high-quality facilities. They made the sacrifice to provide these com forts to us now and many of them never got a chance to see the com pleted projects. Now it’s our turn to give back. As many people as we. Student Government and the bond com mittee at UNCA have reached and informed, I feel as though there are many of you out there who still have questions, and are unsure of how to vote on these bonds that you have heard of I’m here to clear up any rumors and put your mind at ease on this incredible and his toric issue by giving you some fre quently asked questions and their answers. Q: If approved by voters in No vember, how will the $3.1 billion bond issue be used? A: The bonds will upgrade every state and community college cam pus. Bonds will provide $2.5 bil lion for repair, renovation and con struction of classrooms, science and technology labs and dorms at all 1 (S UNC campuses, and will finance federally-mandated upgrades at UNC-TV. Another $600 million will go towards upgrading capacity at all 59 community college institu tions. Q: Exactly what will the money go for? A: The state Legislature has passed a law with a specific list of projects for university improvements and you can see that list at WWW.uncbuildings.org. At commu nity colleges, there is a formula that determines exactly how much each campus will get, and you can look at that formula on the N.C. com munity college web site, www.ncccs.cc.nc.us. As far as UNCA goes, there are numerous projects that will be funded by the bonds. To see this list, please visit the UNCA homepage (www.unca.edu) and click on the higher education bonds link at the top of the page. Q: When will the bond funds be spent, and when will they be re paid? A: The bonds will be issued over a six-year period beginning in 2001, in amounts (regulated by law) that will enable community college and university campuses to manage the construction and renovation effi ciently, while minimizing disrup tion for students. The bonds will be repaid over a 25 year period, allow ing the state to pay for the buildings as they are used-just like a mortgage on your home. Q: Will there be any oversight of this spending and construction? A: Yes. The General Assembly has created a Higher Education Bond Oversight Committee, which will monitor progress on the capital plans and receive regular reports and updates from the university, the community colleges, the State Treasurer, and the Office of State Construction. To ensure that the construction program is carried out in the timely manner expected by the General Assembly, the Com mittee will advise relevant agencies and make recommendations on the timing and uses of bond issuances. In addition, the bond legislation specifies the amount of bond fund ing that will flow to each university campus and to each community college. For each university cam pus, the legislation further details the level of bond funding intended for every building project listed in the act. Thus, voters will know pre cisely how the $3.1 billion bond issue will be distributed and used. Q: Isn’t this a large amount of debt for the state to carry? A: No. North Carolina’s current debt is one of the lowest in the nation. Even after all currently au thorized debt is issued, including the university and community col lege bonds, the state’s level of debt will be relatively low. Analysts project that between now and 2025, the state’s annual required debt- service payment would exceed 3 percent of the state’s General Fund budget in only three years [2004- OS, 3.1 percent; 2005-06, 3.2 per cent; and 2006-07, 3.3 percent]. Financial experts consider any amount under 5 percent to be con servative to moderate debt. State Treasurer Harlan Boyles supports the issuance of these bonds as a sound investment in valuable assets owned by the citizens of North Carolina. Q: Will my taxes need to go up to pay for the bonds? A: No. While no one can predict whether taxes will go up for other reasons. State Treasurer Harlan Boyles and many other state leaders have plainly stated that the state will be able to repay these bonds without the need to raise taxes. Q: Will tuition and student fees go up to pay for the bonds? A: No. Tuition and general stu dent fees will not be used to repay the university and community col lege bonds. As it has always done, the university will continue to use designated fees to support construc tion and upkeep of certain student facilities. For example, rental fees paid by students living in campus residence halls help pay for the con struction and maintenance of these buildings. Q: Doesn’t the state already pro vide fijnds to pay for building con struction and renovation on uni versity campuses? A: University buildings belong to the state, and the General Assembly is the primary source of new build ing and renovation funds for the university. Still, over the past 75 years, the university has generated about 40 percent of all construc tion dollars spent from its own re sources. Because of the General Assembly’s historic pay-as-you-go approach to capital financing, the state’s record on providing funds for university construction has been both erratic and inadequate, based on whether there was money left over after all operating needs have been met. This bond issue would provide a reliable stream of capital funding to meet enrollment growth, and would also enable the university to address the huge backlog of repair and renova tion needs that has accumulated over many decades. Q; Aren’t the counties respon sible for constructing and main taining community college build ings? A: Community college buildings do belong to the counties that spon sor them, and counties historically have been the principal source of funding for their construction and maintenance. Over the years, how ever, many community colleges have received special legislative ap propriations for capital, and the entire community college system benefited from a 1993 statewide bond issue. Given shifting economies, many local governments, particularly ru ral and “low-wealth” counties, have found it increasingly difficult to keep their campuses up-to-date without supplemental state assis tance. In fact, about 40 percent of the total capital investment in the comrhunity college system has come from state funds. The proposed 2000 bond issue would require many local govern ments to partially match funds tar geted for new community college buildings. This matching require ment has been reduced or waived for low-wealth counties and elimi nated for counties that have ex ceeded historicmatch requirements. There is no matching requirement for repair and renovation projects. Thus, the use of bond funds will permit expansion and renovation without the need to raise property taxes. Q: Are the historically black uni versity campuses getting their fair share of the bond funding? A: Yes. While the consultant’s findings and recommendations were based on actual needs as op posed to a pre-determined formula, on a per-student basis or other com parisons, the university’s five his torically black campuses will re ceive an equitable share of the bond proceeds. Moreover, since the black campuses, along with other smaller campuses, have less ability to gen erate their own funds for campus projects such as dormitories and similar student facilities, a much higher proportion of their identi fied five-year capital needs will be funded through the bonds than is the case with larger campuses. Q: How did university and com munity college buildings get in a condition that requires such a large investment in repairs and renova tions? A: University buildings have been constructed over two centuries, and as they age, facilities inevitably be come outdated or require building system repairs. Over the years, the university has regularly requested state appropriations to carry out needed repairs and renovations, but the General Assembly’s ability or willingness to provide such funds has come nowhere close to meeting the documented need. Only since 1993 has the state provided a steady source of funds for the routine up keep of state buildings, including university buildings. Also, many older university buildings are no longer suited for their original pur poses. Nothing short of a major retrofit can adapt 1940s laboratories to ac commodate 21st-century uses, for example. Consider the case of Hines Hall at North Carolina A&T, a 50- year-old chemistry building that is dilapidated, overcrowded, and lacks air conditioning and proper venti lation. Even if it were restored to pristine 1950 condition, this build ing would be completely inadequate for modern-day chemistry instruc tion. Similarly, the Community Col lege System is almost 40 years old, and many campus facilities are even older. Many community college buildings have undergone little or no renovation since they were first constructed, due to limited local Whe resse! iid loi For |e the rst tr e lea ical ( na ch ,lWc ntly e wil ig in jithin El resources. Q: How can we be sure that our state-owned buildings won’t fall into disrepair in the future? A: While the Reserve for Repair and Renovations, established in 1993 to provide annual funds for the routine upkeep of state-owned buildings, is an excellent program, it can’t begin to eliminate the university’s backlog of renovation needs that accumulated over many years prior to 1993. Furthermore, it only works when it is funded. The bond issue will address this backlog, helping the state get and remain current on preserving its university assets. Q: What happens to the commu nity colleges and the university if this bond issue doesn’t pass? A: Access to a community college or university education will be sig nificantly restricted, and the dem onstrated economic benefits derived from our fine community college and university systems will be lim ited. By law, community colleges main tain an “open door” policy, with space for everybody who can and wants to learn. If voters reject this bond issue, many colleges will be forced to turn people away who need to gain technical skills, pre pare for further higher education, or earn high school credentials. The most dramatic impact is likely to be in fast-growing industries, which already demand more trained graduates than community colleges have room to produce. Similarly, faced with enrollment growth of over 30 percent in the next decade, university campuses will be unable to admit many quali fied N.C. students. Some campuses already have had to limit admis sions due to lack of space. The university’s reputation for excel lence in teaching and research gives N.C. a competitive economic ad vantage, but unless we repair and renew our classrooms, laboratories, and other buildings, that competi tive edge will be losr. Nov. 6 at 11:50 a.m., come to the dining hall and support the bonds at the bond referendum rally spon sored by SGA. We will be the host of several local incumbent legisla tors of the area, including senators Charles Carter and Steve Metcalf, aad representatives Wilma Sherrill, Lanier Cansler and Martin Nesbit. Please join us in support of this most urgent issue and feel free to contact us with any questions or comments you may have at 251- 6587 or sga@bulldog.unca.edu. Poll Jemc lepul )lace hat t ’arty ling. I’ve hat V or Bi s a th nuch wt Dear In li ciden is a a vhen tude :onm :he U lame: UNC Co' Dear I h peopl becau They with their No' the b: preps I a times comr shod penei the c shou! insta ageo crimi thing ago, out I I ai inclu talke sessi( perse
University of North Carolina at Asheville Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Nov. 2, 2000, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75