The Collegian Wednesday, January 31, 1990
Opinion
Letter to the Editor;
Reader finds Spanos’
article controversial
but flawed
Dear Editor,
I suppose you are doing the
college community a service by
printing opinion pieces like
Christine Spanos' "Aid For The
Unworthy," (Wednesday, January
24, 1990), in which she grouses
about drug-using students getting
financial aid.
Her contentions that no one
should have a problem with
taking a test for illegal drugs,
that "it would be only the drug
users themselves who claim that
their constitutional rights are
being violated," and that students
who use drugs "have already
forfeited their constitutional
rights" should stimulate
discussion. I can see the bags of
mail from right (or should I say
lcft)-thinking students piling up
on your desk, all verbally
pummeling this form of latter
day McCarthyism.
My problem with your
running that piece is the
atrocious writing and muddled
thinking exhibited by Ms.
Spanos and foisted on us by your
lack of editorial oversight. She
writes like one of those drug
Dr. Cogley,
I appreciate your grammatical critique of Spanos'
column. However, I'm slightly disappointed that you
didn't express your stand on the issue presented in that
piece.
While your position may seem fairly clear, as
indicated by your strange use of "McCarthyism,"
ultimately, you avoid the subject.
We encourage you and all of our readers to continue
to write to The Collegian. Hopefully, though, future
letters will voice the writer’s opinion on issues.
To address this letter, your fifth point is valid. The
subject/verb agreement is incorrect. As for your other
points, I see them as the author's use of voice as
opposed to careless grammatical errors.
By the way, my editor’s pencil is blue, not red.
The Collegian's editorial opinion is determined by the editor, with
the editor holding final responsibility. Opinions expressed in The
Collegian are not necessarily those of The Collegian or the
Pennsylvania State University.
Letter Policy: The Collegian encourages tetters on news coverage,
editorial content and university affairs. Letters should be
typewritten, double-spaced and signed by no more than two persons.
Letters should be no longer than 400 words. Letters should include
the semester and major of the writer. All letters should provide the
address and phone number of the writer for verification of the letter.
The Collegian reserves the right to edit letters for length and to
reject letters if they are libelous or do not conform to standards of
good taste.
Postal Information: The Collegian (898-6488) is published weekly
by the students of the Behrend College; The Reed Union Building,
Station Road, Erie, Pa 16563.
abusers she rails against. A few
choice examples follow:
1. "spanning across our
nation" (across is redundant)
2. "Latin American countries
continue to be our global
enemies in the war against drugs"
(no, its the drug-running mobs in
those countries, not the countries
themselves)
3. "negative contributors" (an
oxymoron, used twice)
4. "Like any issue, there
are...two sides" ("As with any
issue...")
S. "If a student is using drugs,
they...” ("he/she...”
This is a college student's
writing? It's 100 painful to
continue listing the screwy
examples of her usage, syntax,
and grammar. Ms. Spanos should
register for a few more English
courses and you editors ought to
be more vigilant with your red
pencils. Let's just hope the
governor doesn't see that issue of
the Collegian and take back the
check.
Sincerely yours,
Dr. Don Cogley (Chemistry)
Editorial Policy
LOVE ROB
Rob admits to financial
aid abuse
by Rob Prindle
I'm really in financial trouble, and yet, I
cannot help feeling that it is all my fault. I need
to feed my addiction.
I'll tell you what happened, but as always, I
must warn you that this will not be pretty. Not
pretty at all.
You see it all started when the government
gave me some money. You all know about the
state and federal governments’ dedication to
higher education. That dedication has somehow
led to Pennsylvania rating at the very bottom in
terms of money for students. Hell, in a lot of
states, the public colleges are virtually free. And
the federal government headed by Reagan...ah, I
mean Bush wants to cut back student aid to the
tune of several billion dollars.
So anyway, the powers-that-be invited me to
fill out a few hundred questions on a financial aid
request form. When that was done they sent Penn
State a check. It wasn't as much as I had hoped
for, and when I totaled up the lime I'd spent on
the application, I figure I made about minimum
wage for the hours I put in.
But then my troubles started. You see,
because the government felt I was poor enough
to warrant aid for my tuition, I was inevitably
left with some pocket money. Didn't they realize
what trouble I might get into?
Now I'm the type of guy who can't save a
buck. You know me, money bums a hole in my
pocket. As soon as I find a fiver in my wallet I
always like to do something crazy with it - like,
oh I don't know - make a car payment, or an
insurance payment, or buy something frivolous
like food. And that's where all the trouble started.
What I at first thought of as merely a
harmless pastime turned into a real need. In the
early days I ate once in a while, just at parties...
you know what I mean? Then, as my addiction
grew, I began to feel hungry almost every day.
Some days I would eat two, maybe three times.
And I really got worried when I started eating
alone. Some pasta, maybe a wing or two. It
didn't matter. And the cost of my addiction soared
along with my waist size.
My story is an old, familiar one indeed.
Now, as a senior, I am several thousand
dollars in debt and all because the government
gave me student aid.
Yeah, right.
Lately there have been some accusations that
students who receive financial aid are using that
money for drugs and therefore needy students
should be tested for drugs before they get the big
bucks.
This argument is flawed and lame.
First, there arc students who receive aid that
do use drugs. Somehow they come up with the
money, but it would be a very minor hibit indeed
that could be fed by the pittance that our
government turns over to students for their
education.
Second, drug testing is bad, all the way
around. It is very expensive. It is flawed - some
experts say that false readings are as common as
one third. It is an invasion of privacy • if urine
isn't sacred, what is? It is degrading - a lab
assistant stands in the room with you to make
sure you aren't importing any fake piss. It is a
presumption of guilt - a testee is presumed guilty
until his/her urine is found to be clean.
And finally, why are people so worried about
students contributing to the drug problem? I don't
Rob Prindle
have any stats in front of me, but it doesn't take
a Senate sub-committee report to realize that the
biggest abuses of illegal drugs come from
impoverished inner city neighborhoods on one
end and wealthy suburb dwellers on the other.
Cocaine - also known as "the rich man’s
aspirin" - is very popular among our higher paid
professionals. And cocaine is just the start. The
abuse of prescription drugs like Pcrcodan and
Valium has always been a problem. And what
about the offspring of the upperclass?
I'm talking about the rich students who make
up a good part of our universities. For a good
look at how prevalent usage is among them, read
"Less Than Zero" by Bret Ellis (don't rent the
watered-down movie). In the book, the author of
this autobiographical account shows just how
dependent some pockets of America's young rich
have become on drugs.
Aren't these people supporting the drug trade?
Since the proposed drug testing would only be
for financial aid applicants, does that mean that
you can use drugs and attend a state funded school
- like Behrend - as long as you can afford your
own drugs? Since schools like Penn State are
supported by tax money, shouldn't every student
be tested?
No, of course not. The only kinds of testing
that should be imposed on students are the kinds
that take place in classrooms.
Page