Don’t bash effective programs

In his column in the Feb. 20 issue, John McCormack disparagingly characterizes the $13,000 Student Association Colonial Coach program and the $1,000 program providing free condoms in residence halls as “offensive” and “pork-barrel projects” (“Why the SA president does not deserve $15,000 of your money,” p. 4). In my opinion, Mr. McCormack’s representation of these programs is inaccurate and unjustified.

At a time when most students don’t even bother to vote in SA elections, it hardly seems appropriate to criticize two of the few effective, sensible and popular SA initiatives. Both programs provide a valuable service to the entire student community. In all of the financial waste produced at every level of this institution, surely Mr. McCormack could have found $14,000 more worthy of reproach.

Contrary to the author’s argument, programs such as these are examples of why the SA president does deserve the annual scholarship. The potential benefits of genuine student leadership are not insignificant, and those who are willing and able to provide such leadership ought to be rewarded.

-Josh Parker, Senior

Take steps to remedy high costs

While reading about the rising cost of attending GW, I couldn’t help but wonder why the rate of inflation in education outpaces that of other goods. I think some of the fault lies with the costly incentives schools use to attract potential students. However, instead of drawing students in, I fear that the overall cost of a GW education will drive many prospective students away.

GW could help remedy this by doing several things. First, axe several programs, namely the housekeeping in the freshman dorms and the 4-RIDE service. This has already been done with the residential readership program. Although nice, these programs in no way influenced my decision to attend GW and have not dramatically improved my experience here, as I’m sure other students will concur.

Second, GW could fully embrace “greening” the school. The most cost-conscious corporation in the world, Wal-Mart, has become more environmentally friendly and is now literally saving billions of dollars a year. An added benefit to this would be positive PR generated for the school. Combined with cutting certain programs, implementing a greening program could yield dramatic savings to GW and help stem the amount of future cost hikes.

-Tim Conroy, Senior

No obligation to support a bad team

In response to Andy Bergbauer’s letter to the editor (“Beware of the fake fans” Feb. 20, p. 4), I must say that I agree that he should feel bad for being a GW men’s basketball fan. It’s sad that Bergbauer tries to guilt people into feeling like bad fans for leaving early. They should have left: the team was playing terribly. Why support a bad product?

Remember, Mr. Bergbauer, your parents help to pay for the scholarships of these basketball players, and if the product isn’t a quality one, why shouldn’t students leave? Shouldn’t they be allowed to show their discontent? They should be able to put their basketball team scholarship money elsewhere.

The 24-game home win streak was achieved against inferior opponents who couldn’t figure out that the way to beat the zone is to shoot three-pointers, as Xavier did. I’m glad that Mr. Bergbauer is happy that he is a “true fan” of a team that isn’t putting out the results of the “powerhouse program” that he thinks GW can become.

I guess that much should be expected from a team whose coach gets thrown out of a close game and single-handedly costs the team the game. GW will never be a basketball powerhouse if we’re led by an immature coach, play in a tiny arena and have fans who think the problems lie with other fans and not with the team and its coaches.

-Joshua Masayoshi Huff, Sophomore