With an election set to begin March 20, the lone student representative position on the high-profile UB Council is up for grabs, and our hope is whoever wins the job utilizes the office to advocate more vigorously on behalf of students.
The council, which acts as an advisory board to the UB president, comprises nine members appointed by the New York governor to seven-year terms, along with a single student member elected to a one-year term. The appointees on the advisory board are where its true power can be found, but perspectives voiced by the student could influence decisions as well. The key, then, is to have quality student representation on the board, which is where the three candidates factor in for the upcoming vote.
There are two graduate students, Todd Chard and Jenna Chrisphonte, and one undergraduate, Peter Rizzo, running for the position. We are not familiar with the graduate students or their platforms, but Rizzo's prior work proves he has the potential to make a difference in terms of reform, which should be the overriding concern of anyone elected. There is potential for more being done than what we've seen in the past from the student position, and those running would be wise to take that into account if they win.
Though the position is vulnerable to being a figurehead, the next student on the UB Council should take every step to make the experience more than just resume padding, and work on expanding its relevance within UB's student population. This would make the position more than just an administration puppet giving the illusion of a student voice among the adults who run this university.
You asked for it
Bush's assault on first amendment is what the nation craves
Recent White House efforts at controlling unauthorized leaks threatens to destroy traditional investigative reporting, representing the biggest danger to first amendment rights since Nixon's goons debated assassinating columnist Jack Anderson under the guise of "national security." Nothing less than our nations free press is at stake, yet, according to pollsters, most Americans could care less.
In its disingenuous zeal at curbing leaks, the White House is targeting journalists and their government sources with threats of espionage charges. White House supporters claim protecting classified info will aid in winning the war on terror.
We couldn't disagree more, and find the White House actions reprehensible and damaging to our democracy. Without a free press advocating for the public good, we are nothing more than the old Soviet Union propaganda machine, putting forth government spin as news.
But many in our nation have different views of the first amendment's role, especially the "freedom of the press" clause. The John S. and James L. Knight Foundation found over half of high-school students think newspapers should not be able to publish articles without the government's permission. In fact, according to American Journalism Review, freedom of the press was the least popular of the five freedoms protected by the first amendment. Forty percent of Americans actually felt "the press has to much freedom." A CNN/Gallup poll found 60 percent thought keeping "military secrets" was more important than having a free press, and a Fox News poll found 61 percent were willing to give up "some" of their personal freedom to reduce the "threat" of terrorism.
None of this should come as a surprise. The Synovate research firm found 22 percent of Americans could name all five members of the fictional Simpson family, yet only one in 1,000 could name all first amendment freedoms. More frightening was only one on four could name one freedom protected by the first amendment but more than half can name two members of the Simpson's. Need we say more?
