NSNS News

As some American students crowd Copenhagen for the U.N. climate summit, Ohio students are still working at home to kick coal off of their campuses. Over 25 students from around Ohio continued work begun at a regional Power Shift conference in November, gathering at the Ohio State University campus in Columbus this past weekend. Students slept outside and hosted speakers to help plan for clean energy.

Mattie Reitman, the founder of the Ohio Student Environmental Coalition, spoke about Ohio’s coal-centered history.

“We need to obliterate the false assumption that dismantling our coal industry will wipe out jobs.”

The Ohio Coal Association directly disagrees. A statement on their website reads that legislation restricting carbon emissions would “have a drastic impact on Ohio's economy by eliminating jobs in eastern and southern Ohio.”

Other coal researchers at the Ohio Coal Research Center, a branch of Ohio University, are still looking for ways to make biofuel and coal less polluting.

But OSEC students and their allies think that any kind of biofuel is the wrong kind.

Nachy Kanfer, a represenatative of the Sierra Student Coalition’s Beyond Coal Campaign, touched on the recent cancellation of a proposed local coal plant. “We need to stop funding coal projects in Ohio,” said Kanfer. “As Ohioans, we are calling on decision-makers to invest in truly clean energy, like solar and wind.”

The Sierra Club is running campaigns to get coal off of college campuses in 11 states around the country.

Students from OSU, Hiram College, and Oberlin College are working together under the banner of OSEC to make strong demands of the Ohio state legislature. They are calling for legislators to end state subsidies to coal, reinvest that money into clean energy, and pass a stricter carbon emissions ceiling.

The students have been communicating with the office of Ohio Governor Strickland, who said that the state of Ohio used $84 million of federal stimulus money to invest in non-coal advanced energy projects.

OSEC is planning to continue their work in the spring, with organizer Tim Krueger applying for funding from Brighter Planet to have regular sleepouts at the state capitol.

More from Brighter Planet
More from the Ohio Coal Association
More from the Ohio Coal Research Center
More from the Sierra Student Coalition

By Meryl Dakin and Levi Pine

Now that the dust has settled on the roughly 7,000 person strong G-20 protest at the University of Pittsburgh, many are crying foul over police conduct towards student protesters and bystanders.

Last week, protesters from around the country, many of whom were college students, demonstrated outside the G-20 economic summit held at the University of Pittsburgh campus.  Among their objections to the meetings were complaints that such important economic decisions are made by a handful of people behind closed doors.

While the protest itself has gotten widespread coverage already, many protesters and reporters are now accusing the police force of acting improperly and targeting students.  Central Connecticut State University student Jeff Bartos was among the 110 arrested, and is one of the plaintiffs in the ACLU case to be brought against Pittsburgh and its police.

According to the Associated Press, University of Pittsburgh Police Chief Tim Delaney acknowledged that some of the students arrested “were just trying to get into [their] dormitories.”

66 students have joined the Facebook Group “I got tear-gassed at Pitt”. The group’s description reads “[This group is] for everyone who saw the ridiculous, unprovoked attacks by police on students.”

Oberlin College student Stella Byrne told that students were disproportionately victims of excessive police force.

“Cops probably outnumbered students three-to-one. [They] chased students onto campus and shot them with rubber bullets in the quad,” said Byrne over the phone. “Thursday night was totally horrifying to see because nobody was expecting this level of violence. [Students] were coming home from parties and getting gassed.”

“The line was blurred between protesters and citizens,” explained Byrne, who said that the police used tear gas, pepper spray, smoke bombs, dogs, and helicopters to control crowds.

"Some man who came up to us…said if we didn't leave, they would tear gas us," said Pitt student Angela Gorno.

Byrne described how riot police surrounded several hundred people and threatened tear gas if they did not disperse, and then “made it completely impossible to leave.” A video of the incident is posted on the Pittsburgh Police Brutality blog.

A petition from Democracy In Action has 1185 signatures, requesting that all charges against protesters be dropped, and that the City of Pittsburgh launch an investigation on police tactics at the protests.
 

More from Kent State University’s Kent News Net
More from the “I got tear-gassed at Pitt” Facebook group
More from the Pittsburgh Police Brutality blog
More from the New Britain Herald
More from the AP
More from the Pitt News at the University of Pittsburgh on the use of tear gas, acoustic weapons, and the city investigation into police conduct

By Sam Dolgin-Gardner, NSNS staff writer

A University of Chicago
group called Students Taking Action Now: Darfur (STAND) is engaging in
aggressive public protests—and guerrilla protests—to convince the
administration to divest from companies that support the Sudanese
Khartoum regime.  Members have organized protests on campus, engaged
newly-appointed President Robert Zimmer directly in town hall meetings,
and snuck into a meeting of the Board of Trustees in an attempt to
bring their case directly to the Board.

The University of
Chicago has had a longstanding policy, elucidated in the 1967 Kalven
report, which states that the University will “maintain an independence
from fashions, passions and pressures.”  The Board of Trustees used
this as a rationale in their decision not to divest.  Instead, they
have created a $200,000 “Darfur Action and Education” fund to address
issues related to the conflict in Darfur and are welcoming proposals. 
STAND has called this “blood money” and put up posters on campus with a
picture of a bullet and the message that the University has paid for it.

The
University does not divulge the specific nature of the investments of
its more than 5 billion dollar endowment, which has risen almost 2
billion dollars since 2003. Consequently it is impossible to know if,
in fact, University funds are being invested in companies with
unscrupulous practices.  STAND, for its part, has not released the
names of companies it considers unacceptable.

The Sudan
Divestment Taskforce, the worldwide divestment advocacy group, does not
publicly release the names of companies “under scrutiny.”  Instead, it
works directly with entities that wish to divest their funds.  Last
year, under their guidance, the University of California system
divested from numerous companies, including Bharat Heavy Electricals,
Sinopec, and Petrochina.  Many of these companies see excellent return
on investment.  Bharat Heavy Electricals, an Indian manufacturer of
power generating and transmitting equipment, gave a 142% dividend last
fiscal year.

The University of Chicago, in its investment
strategy overview, states that it invests 12.5% of its endowment in
international equities in emerging markets.  If only 1% of that $625
million had been invested in Bharat Heavy Electricals, it would have
been enough to pay for the entirety of the newly created “Darfur Action
and Education Fund” many times over.

By Peggy Mansperger

“There’s nothing I can do.”

“It won’t make a difference anyway.”

These are just a couple of the phrases that have given our generation
the stereotype of apathy and self-centeredness. But according to Paul
Loeb, author of Soul of a Citizen and The Impossible Will Take a Little While,
students are neither apathetic nor self-centered—they are just unaware
of the problems, unaware of the solutions, or unaware that they can
make a difference.

Loeb is a man who has been working to increase students’ awareness in these three arenas. According to his website,
he “has spent over thirty years researching and writing about citizen
responsibility and empowerment.” He has written five books, lectured at
400 colleges and universities, and last Friday, graciously became my
interviewee. What he had to say was powerful.

Awareness of the Problems

We began with the problem of students being unaware of the issues. In
order to understand this problem, Loeb says that we must ask who is at
fault for students not knowing.

In December 2005, the Bush administration cut $12.7 million in Federal financial aid. In one of his articles,
Loeb writes that while traveling the college circuit, he asked students
if they knew about the cuts. “A few knew,” he says, “maybe one in five.
The rest had no sense the cuts had even occurred, in part because [the
cuts’] greatest impact was buried in the fine print of student loan
agreements. As a result, students’ voices were silent when the cuts
went through.” Asked who is at fault, he says, “ National Media. Campus
Newspapers. Administrations. The administrations fought it, but didn’t
get the students involved. They should’ve gotten them involved, because
it was a threat to the students. Some did act, like the United States
Student Association (USSA). But all of these [groups] could have
involved others. We can do something if we get others involved.”

Ultimately, Loeb suggests that in order for students to know more,
we must demand to know more—and we must share what we know with others.
Becoming informed, and helping others to become informed, is the
responsibility of all of us. (To toot our own horn, Loeb gave the
National Student News Service props for our role in this.)

But what should students do once they know there is a problem? First, says Loeb, we must ask the hard questions.

He told me the story of a student who had helped in a homeless
shelter. The student said that his volunteer experience felt so great
he hoped his grandchildren would be able to work in that same homeless
shelter one day. A friend turned to him and said, “You should hope
there won’t be any need.” Why are homeless shelters necessary? What is
the bigger problem? These are the types of hard questions Loeb says we
must ask.

Additionally, Loeb suggests we must be brave when confronting a new
problem. “Don’t be afraid to take risks,” he says. “Know that when you
start to act, you may not have all the answers. And that’s ok. You can
say ‘I can get back to you.’ It’s okay to get into things a step at a
time.” He also says we must not shy away from difficult topics. “We
cannot be afraid to talk about the hard issues: Guantanamo, Iraq,
Global Warming. We have to talk about it. That’s the only way to get
thinking about it, so then we can address it.”

Awareness of the Solutions

Loeb says students are recognizing the problems our country is facing,
and that we’ve unfairly been labeled as apathetic. But once we’ve
recognized the problems, the next step is to do something about them.
“We gain something profound when we stand up for our beliefs, just as
part of us dies when we know that something is wrong, yet do nothing,”
he said.

Loeb encourages bravery in our actions as well as our questions. He
says lots of situations “begin with terrible odds, but we find ways to
act.” As ways to the solutions, Loeb recommends trying to learn as much
about the issues as possible, putting pressure on campus and national
media to educate students and people in general, and getting other
people involved. Above all, he says, “always remember the possibility.
If you do nothing, nothing will happen. Remember that others are
involved. It is amazing how much a few people can do.”

In illustrating the difference students can make, Loeb told the
story of the Coalition of Immokalee Workers, tomato pickers who started
a boycott against Taco Bell for improved wages and working conditions.
The four-year boycott grew into a victory largely because of the
support of college students. According to an article on the Democracy Now website,
twenty-two colleges successfully removed or blocked Taco Bell
businesses from their campuses. The students’ boycott helped encourage
Taco Bell to increase the amount it pays for tomatoes, and thereby
helped improve the workers’ living and working conditions.

Loeb believes a large part of the solution to any problem lies in
getting other people involved. He suggests students should look at
where other activists have come from, and he illustrates this point
with the story of Rosa Parks. Parks is often misinterpreted as a tired
woman who simply sat down on a bus, but she had been an activist for
twelve years prior to her famous arrest. “This in no way diminishes the
power and historical significance of Parks’s refusal to give up her
seat,” explains Loeb. “But it reminds us that this tremendously
consequential act, along with everything that followed, depended on the
humble and frustrating work that Parks and others undertook earlier
on.”

Loeb uses this example to remind us that change is not immediate and
that slow progress should not discourage us from acting. He quotes
religious activist Jim Wallis: “Hope is believing in spite of the
evidence, then watching the evidence change.”

The example of Rosa Parks also debunks the myth that activists come
out of nowhere, says Loeb. “Who got Rosa Parks involved [in the civil
rights struggle]? Her husband Raymond Parks. Who got Raymond Parks
involved? We don’t know, but [Raymond Parks] was a barber; it may have
been one of his customers. Whoever it was, what if it wasn’t for that
first person? Get other people involved, and you may be getting the
next Rosa Parks involved.”

Awareness That We Can Make a Difference

Loeb said that some people suffer from a sense that what they do is not
going to matter. To these students, Loeb tries to tell stories that
say, “You never know.”

“People don’t think that registering voters and knocking on doors
matters, but they have to recognize that sometimes there are very small
races.” He said that in an election near his hometown, a candidate won
with a 134-vote difference. “If it wasn’t for the maybe 25,000 people
on the campaign, it wouldn’t have happened. They swung the difference.”

Loeb says that part of knowing that we can make a difference lies in
knowing what others have done before us. He told the story of a student
who complained to him that our schools teach us that Lincoln freed the slaves and women got the right to vote, but not how
they did it. In the words of the student, “We don’t learn the
processes, just the result.” Loeb says we need to ask schools to teach
us those processes—what has been done, what worked before, and what
made a difference.

When I asked how to get other people on board, Loeb said to find the heart of the issue.

“Tell it in a way that makes it real, not just the numbers,” he
recommends. “Numbers are powerful, but you’d do best to say ‘this is
why I’m involved; this is why I’m really concerned.’”

“People have to feel like what they do is going to matter,” he
continued. “When the unforeseen benefits of our actions are taken into
account, any effort may prove more consequential than it seems at
first.”

Loeb told the story of twenty young women who stood protesting in
the rain. They left feeling defeated—like they hadn’t made a
difference. Years later, one of the women stood at a similar protest
among thousands. Dr. Spock (a famous child psychologist) took the
stage—he had used his celebrity status to spread awareness about the
issue, and now he was there to speak. Standing in front of the
thousands he had helped get involved, he told the story of how years
before he had once seen twenty women in the rain protesting this very
same issue. He said he thought to himself, “If they think it’s that
important I should look into it.” He did, and then dedicated himself to
it. Those twenty women had made a huge difference.

“People are told they don’t have the standing to have a voice. But
[the powers that be] tell that to everyone. People think ‘I don’t know
enough. Others are better; they know more.’ We come up with lots of
excuses. And so we end up setting a standard that none of us can meet.
And that is very dangerous.”

“Always remember the possibility,” he said.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Learn more about Loeb and his books, and read or sign up to receive his articles by visiting his website: www.paulloeb.org.

By Sam Dolgin-Gardner, NSNS Staff Writer 

CHICAGO—More than 2,000 college students recruited by People for the
American Way acted as Polling Place Administrators in Chicago's recent
municipal elections.  Recruited for their tech-savvy and natural
affinity for computers, electronics, and gadgets, the students assisted
election judges by setting up electronic voting machines,
troubleshooting problems with the machines, and tabulating votes at the
end of the day.

Chicago introduced electronic voting last year, using equipment
manufactured by Sequoia Voting Systems. Chicago's voters are given a
choice of marking a paper ballot that is then read and recorded by an
optical scanner (like an SAT answer sheet), or using a touch-screen
computer that prints a paper record of each voter's ballot.  Several
hundred students were trained to provide voter assistance at the point
that electronic machines were introduced.  Their performance convinced
election officials to recruit thousands more for the recent election.

Despite the new technology, Chicago's elections ran smoothly.  Students
were able to assist confused judges and voters, helping the oldest
right of the republic enter the modern age.

by Peggy Mansperger

On April 14, people all over the country will hold events for “Step It Up: A National Day of Climate Action.” Organized by six recent college graduates and Bill McKibben, scholar in residence at Middlebury College, Step It Up is expected to be the largest day of citizen action focused on global warming in U.S. history.

Step It Up is designed to capitalize on the national movement to spread awareness about global warming. Parents, children, entrepreneurs, and college students are setting up rallies and events in the name of Step It Up, demanding that Congress put the United States “on a course to cut carbon emissions 80% by 2050.”

Over 900 events are planned across all 50 states. From senior citizens to first-graders, people are planning ways they can be part of the day’s action. Events are planned locally so supporters can emit the least amount of carbon, and so that the educational impact of events is made at home.

In Florida, scuba divers are planning to hold underwater signs by the damaged reefs. There is a children’s march planned in South Dakota and a “bubble parade” in Berkeley, California. Thousands will rally in New York City. Citizens in other parts of the country plan to rally, march, sing, and bike in their own hometowns.

College students are also joining the movement, helping by planning, promoting, and attending events.  Step It Up boasts allies of student groups like Campus Climate Challenge, Focus the Nation, Sierra Club, and Student Conservation Voters. The Student Public Interest Research Groups’ website explains that University of Maryland College Park students started their Step It Up campaign a month in advance. They’ve gathered over 300 photo petitions of students asking Congress to “Step It Up! Reduce Carbon by 2050.”

University of California San Diego students are going to rally on the green of Eleanor Roosevelt College. The University’s student environmental groups are getting involved, and so are colleges like Paul Smith’s College. Students at SUNY Oneonta and Hartwick College are painting murals. Student clubs are joining together in La Jolla, California.

The nation’s sororities, too, are getting involved.  In January, Bill McKibben wrote an article showing that the Alpha Phi Sorority chapter from the University of Texas at Austin was helping to spur the Step It Up events and issues.

Teachers are motivating some of the organizing students and friends are motivating others, but all are being motivated by the possibility of making a difference.

For more information on Step It Up, go to: http://www.stepitup2007.org/

With the quickly spreading interest in going green campus groups are leading the way to an environmentally friendly future.  At the University of California-Los Angeles, it's the Greeks that are helping to spread the phenomena. Changing small habits in their campus houses is helping for the campus to embrace the new green change.  With a large Greek population on the campus, the community is hoping that their knowledge and work will spread to the rest of the campus community.

More from the UCLA newspaper, The Daily Bruin
More from The Panther
More from the DePauw University newspaper, The DePauw

Students depending on their parents’ homeowner’s insurance to cover their personal property while away at school may be in for a big disappointment, especially if they live off-campus.  Rich Job, a sale representative for Bank of the West, said renters' insurance is important for both the protection of personal property and student liability coverage. Many plans offer pay-by-month options, which are relatively affordable. The main reason for students not purchasing these policies is the belief that a landlord's insurance will cover them, when in fact it solely covers the landlord's property. According to the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, most university dormitories are covered by university insurance, but this may only be liability coverage. They recommend reading the fine print on parents’ homeowner’s insurance for students still in dorms, while off-campus students are advised to purchase their own coverage to protect their personal property.

More from the University of South Dakota’s newspaper, the Volante Online
More from the National Association of Insurance Commissioners
More from the Washington Post

By Jose Requena

A number of incidents on campuses across the country suggest that
Muslim students are finding it harder to go about daily life. In these
times of conflict, Muslim students are facing prejudices and legal
loopholes in the pursuit of their education.

Last semester,
incidents ranged from notes full of religious and cultural slurs to—in
perhaps the most extreme example of discriminatory vengeance—a U Mass
Amherst student falsely accusing a Muslim student of terrorist plotting
to the National Security Agency (NSA). This semester, Muslim students
are experiencing trouble again.

In South Carolina, three
Palestinian students’ night out ended in the hospital. The students
claim that several members of the Guildford College football team
assaulted the trio and yelled racial slurs as they attacked. Several
bystander accounts agree. Two of the three victim were themselves
students at Guilford.

“It was the ugliest thing I have ever
seen," said Omar Awartani, one of the victims. Awartani, a freshman
pursuing a double major in aerospace and mechanical engineering at NC
State, was visiting his Guilford friends at the time of the attack.
"I've seen Israeli soldiers doing this to me in Palestine, but I've
never seen this with citizens. It just came with punches, kicks, and
brass knuckles. There were witnesses that told me they were picking up
rocks and bricks and hitting me."

Some fault the campus
Public Safety Office for responding too late, with some witnesses
stating officers took as much as 45 minutes to arrive. College
Spokesman Ty Buckner disputed these claims, saying, "I do know that
they did respond and now we're following up. I would suggest that it
did not take forty-five minutes to respond. I'm sure the college will
assess all the aspects of this event and make sure we're doing what we
need to do."

In Massachusetts, another Muslim student is
engaged in a different kind of fight, although many people perceive the
fight as similarly rooted in discrimination. The Harvard Ph.D.
candidate Omar al-Dewachi is caught in a legal mire that keeps him from
re-entering the U.S. and thus from completing his studies. Al-Dewachi,
who hails from Iraq, came to the U.S. with a passport issued by Sadam
Hussein’s regime. That passport is now obsolete.

Al-Dewachi,
who studies social anthropology, traveled to Montreal to continue his
research on the Iraqi diaspora. As he told the Harvard Crimson in a
telephone interview, he received a U.S. entry visa on Jan. 31 but was
told the next day that the “N” series passport he was planning to use
with the visa was invalid. In order to get the necessary “G” passport
he would have to return to war-torn Baghdad.

“One wonders if
it’s almost a perverse joke,” said Al-Dewachi’s academic advisor Steven
Caton, director of the Center of Middle Eastern Studies and a professor
of contemporary Arab studies in the Department of Anthropology. “I
can’t imagine having to go back to Baghdad...It’s almost a death
sentence, and he obviously has no intention of going back.”

According
to Caton, Dewachi is not the only member of the Harvard community
affected this way by State Department regulations. He said that Asad A.
Ahmed, an assistant professor who was scheduled to teach Anthropology
2675, “Secularism, Religion, and Nation in South Asia” this semester,
is currently awaiting a visa to reenter the United States from Pakistan.

Although
these Muslim students and professors face legal and social obstacles
not common to most Americans, their institutions of education often
show sympathy and support. Guilford, a Quaker college that has
traditionally self-identified as an advocate for peace and social
justice, issued a statement in their website saying that the incident
has altered the college and several steps are being taken to prevent
future problems. Although students like Al-Dewachi are not always lucky
enough to have a concerned advocate like Steven Canton, their school
may help them find other options. Al-Dewachi is attempting to obtain a
travel document from the Canadian government that would identify him as
“stateless,” allowing him to get the visa stamp to pass into the United
States.

Sam (henceforward NSNS): In my blog, I reported on efforts to counteract the effects of Hosty vs. Carter.  When he was attending Green River Community College, student journalist Brian Schraum tried to get his school to implement an anti-censorship policy.  When they refused to do so, he took his fight to Washington.  Olympia, Washington, that is.  He helped introduced a powerful anti-censorship bill that extends protections to high school students as well as college students.  Schraum is now a student at Washington State University. NSNS sat him down for an interview:

NSNS: So you're at Green River College, and you want an anti-censorship policy.  What made you push for one, and what was the administration's reaction?

Brian Schraum: After the Hosty case my thinking was that we should do something at my school to be preemptive, so we drafted the policy and brought it to school officials.  At first they seemed pretty upbeat about it, but then they consulted with their lawyers and backed off of it, so it died.  I was frustrated and knew this representative from a story for the paper I worked on.  I talked with him and we came up this bill.

NSNS: Were you planning on writing articles that the administration would take offense at?

BS: I didn't have this grand plan that I was going to start writing things they would dislike.  It was a philosophical, First Amendment-type thing.  Initially they were supportive of the concept, but once they started talking to their lawyers they were torn between what we were saying and what I would consider to be bad advice from their attorney. He said we couldn't possibly be a forum because students were earning credit for working on the paper.

NSNS: Can you explain the legal concept of a forum?

BS: In Hazelwood vs. Kuhlmeier in 1988, the Supreme Court said the level of control officials have over a paper depends on whether the paper can be considered a public forum.  This gave high school officials the prerogative to decide whether or not to let student editors make content decisions.  If school officials have a standing policy of reviewing student papers, then it isn't a public forum.  What Hosty did was apply that same analysis to college newspapers.  
NSNS: How did you decide to take it to state level?

BS: I got frustrated with the [administrative] process that was going on. The more I got thinking about it, the more I realized that if you leave this decision up to school administrators, they'll err on the side of retaining their power—because it's in their interests to be able to control what people are hearing about their schools.  The only way we were able to make progress on this was to take it to the state level and take this decision out of their hands.  The First Amendment was designed to take this decision out of individual peoples' and states' hands.  Hearing about the censorship in high schools made me want to take action.  That, and knowing this representative [Dave Upthegrove’s (D-Seattle)], who is down to earth, the youngest guy in there.  He took it and ran with it
NSNS: How active are you in its passage through Washington State Government?

BS: I'm not a politician; I'd be a horrible politician.  The bill will be heard in committee on Friday, so I'm going to be testifying.  There are 11 members in the committee and four are cosponsors, so I think the odds are good in that part of it.  We have bipartisan support. Our Republican Attorney General is supportive, as well as a number of Democratic legislators.  Everybody recognizes this thing will live or die based on the high school component of it, how far school officials are willing to go to oppose it.
NSNS: If high schools risk killing this bill, why did you include them?

BS: When I worked on my high school paper, even though I didn't have any censorship problems, there was always that assumption that if you get a little too out of hand you'll get shut down.  If you go to the Student Press Law Center [www.splc.org] you'll see case after case of administrations going after papers.  It was common sense for me.  If you're going to have personal amendment protections, they should be for everyone.  You shouldn't get into that game of “First Amendment applies here and not there.”  The First Amendment applies to everyone.

NSNS: Do you think administrations should be allowed any control over student newspapers?

BS: There are things like libel and invasion of privacy that we hold everyone to.  No one would be opposed to authorities coming in in those cases.  In those limited cases, sure.  Otherwise you've got a situation where the government (public school officials) is censoring journalists (public school journalists).

NSNS: Should private schools be held to the same standards?

BS: No, the bill deals only with public schools.  Public school officials are government officials, private schools are private entities.  California is the only state in the nation that deals with censorship in private schools.  It would be biting off more than we could chew to go after them.
NSNS: How should the distinction be made between the "official" and "independent" school newspapers?

BS: I'm personally opposed to the term "official" school newspaper.  It’s debated whether the school owns the newspaper and owns the speech.  “Student newspaper” in the traditional sense means you've got students getting together on campus in a classroom with an advisor provided by the school, and kids can usually earn credit.  At independent newspapers the students are not involved at school, they're not accepting any school funds, and they're not necessarily getting support from a faculty member.
NSNS: What roles do you think [student newspapers] should be filling?

BS: It's within the rights of anybody who wants to, to go out there and start a publication.  The role of a student newspaper is to be a respectable media source, doing all the things that professional papers are doing and serving as a learning experience for students who are going to go out there and be professionals about this.  One of the most valuable things you can get in education is that real-life experience.  The primary difference would be that traditional student newspapers are more for providing an educational experience for journalism students.

NSNS: What about the tactic of cutting off funding for papers that the administration dislikes?  Is that a violation of free speech?

BS:  I don't know the specific details.  The courts have said that the power of the purse is a clever way of censorship.  It's no different than if the school had said "you're not going to print this period," but that [economic censorship] is more and more the most common form of censorship.  Sometimes they'll cleverly word it like "we're not satisfied with the quality of the paper."  The courts have been pretty understanding that this is a form of censorship. My personal opinion would be that I don't think any school should be obligated to fund a newspaper.  It's unacceptable for public schools to be controlling funds based on content issues.

By Jose Requena 

A story that has been developing these past weeks reveals an ugly side to the student loan industry. As has been reported in several media outlets, the $85 billion student loan industry is under investigation for giving university officials kickbacks for companies’ placement on “preferred lender” lists. The investigation, which began in the New York State Attorney General’s Office, showed (and continues to show) that students seeking financial advice from their schools would be referred to “preferred” companies regardless of better deals or lower interest rates elsewhere.

“Schools are using their position as mediators between students and companies for profit without letting students know they have other options,” says Luke Swarthout, Advocate of Higher Education for U.S. PIRG (Public Interest Research Group).

Since it first broke, the scandal has revealed a host of questionable ethics violations on the part of schools and student loan companies, ranging from the kickbacks first discovered to financial aid call centers that were staffed by loan company employees.

So far eight schools have agreed to reimburse students $3 million for the cost of revenue sharing agreements, and 22 have agreed to New York Attorney General Andrew M. Cuomo’s Code of Conduct, placing hard limitations on the lender/university relationship.

Since the Higher Education Act was amended in 1997, student loan companies have at their disposal a string of penalties and fees to use on defaulted student loan debt—including taking away the protections of bankruptcy. According to higher education advocates, regulating the relationship between educational institutions and these companies is only the beginning of the student protections need.

Last year’s Deficit Reduction Act cut away from several programs, including a $12 billion cut to student loan packages. According to U.S. PIRG, the measure “forces student and parent borrowers to pay excessive interest rates on their loans,” compounding the effect of students being steered toward lenders without regard to interest rates.

“Subsidy isn’t set by the market. Congress sets it,” says Swarthout. “Congress needs to address the student loan program for the benefits of students, not banks. They need to structure to subsidies for better results for the borrowers.”

by Jason Gulya 

Already in 2007 we’ve heard much about the
upcoming elections, both about the primaries and—after speculations
over who will win the primaries—the elections themselves. This trend
has reached colleges nationally, with students more interested at this
early stage than perhaps ever before.

At Rutgers
University, the RU Democrats and the Rutgers College Republicans are
already swapping impressions of the possible 2008 candidates. Around
the country, on-campus groups—whether they be Republican, Democrat, or
affiliated with another political party or ideology—are thinking of
ways to get the younger population out and eager to vote.  Nonpartisan
groups are also working on ways to attract students to the polls. 

One
such group, Maryland Votes, works within the University of Maryland
system.  Bill Grayson, the head of the group, said that they are using
initiatives much different from those of last semester, and—instead of
spending the majority of their time registering students to
vote—they’re urging the colleges to step up and institutionalize
voting.  Maryland Votes has raised the possibility of students being
able to register when they get their school ID. Grayson said he wants
to change the focus of Maryland Votes because he believes the
organization’s time could be better spent educating voters about the
elections themselves.  Also, according to Grayson, a huge problem last
semester was a lack of voting machines (they were promised twelve
machines but only received two, causing some students to stand in line
for almost three hours).  In order to protect the right to vote for
college students, Grayson recommends legislation that would, for
example, ensure a certain number of voting machines

Maryland
Votes has been encouraging students to call their legislators about the
upcoming elections; according to Grayson, this serves to advocate the
advancement of student voting rights and also helps students feel like
they have power over the state of our country.

Grayson
suggests another important aspect of the increased student interest in
the upcoming elections is the effect that it could potentially have on
the outcome. “The one who is most successful will be the one who does
the best at reaching young voters,” he said. Grayson hopes that this
possibility will encourage candidates to talk about issues meaningful
to students. Organizations around the country also believe that the
young voters of the country, once they’ve fully gained interest in
these elections, will become a potent voting in the future.