Student Publications
University of Houston
151C Communications Bldg
Houston, TX 77204-4015
713.743.5350

©1991-2007
Student Publications,
All rights reserved.

Last modified:

Contact:
ktruitt@uh.edu

Opinion
 

Letters to the Editor

Parking situation still warrants screaming

To the editor:

I'm not sure I understand why we are not protesting these practices. We pay $120 for our inconvenient parking pass just so we can end up parking in the economy lot. So you think "next time I will just buy the economy or economy plus," and then see only open spots in the regular lot. Not to mention there are times when even the economy lot has few or no spots available.

Sure, they have this fancy, expensive garage now that can hold somewhere around 1,600 vehicles (out of how many students?). Don't get me wrong -- I'm sure it's well needed for some. It's useless to me since my classes, like many of my peers, are nowhere near the garage, let alone warrant the ridiculous cost of a parking pass for it. 

Despite any legitimate reasons for this shady practice, if there are any, it appears to the students as a money grab. They know how many spaces we have and simply shouldn't sell more than that. Maybe a tool could be made that looks at people's schedules to determine the times and areas they would most likely want to park and sell the passes up to the limit that logistically makes sense. There are IT/CS students here; it could be a project of theirs.

I know I for one am entirely sick of the parking problem. I have to come to school 45 minutes to an hour early just to find a spot if I'm lucky.

My problems are most students' problems, so maybe if we all scream about it together, something could get done.

Shu Latif
studio art junior

Touché

To the editor:

Birte Wolff ("Fraud, laziness becoming an epidemic in academia," Opinion, Thursday) should take her own moralisms to heart. The first paragraph of the column is full of just the errors and misleading statements attributed to others, essentially perpetrating the very "fraud" the column excoriates. 

San Jose State University did not ban DDT; the Environmental Protection Agency banned most of its uses -- not its manufacture. The ban came about, not because of "inaccurate assessments of data" but of a combination of disagreements about the data, strong public sentiment and deeper scientific concerns about persistent pollutants, especially halogenated hydrocarbons like DDT. 

The adverse effects of DDT were not "investigated and then aggregated by the media;" they were investigated by scientists; exaggerations that may have occurred are attributable to Rachel Carson, a science writer, and some environmental advocates; the media mostly just reported on Carson's book and the public reaction to it. 

It is true that DDT has been widely credited with saving millions of lives, but not because of increasing agricultural production, as Wolff claims. Its chief beneficial effect has been mosquito control in parts of Asia and Africa where malaria is endemic. 

Finally, given that Rachel Carson, a scientist, is not an "academic," any errors or exaggerations or misleading statements in her work do not "stem from academic dishonesty." Wolff concludes the paragraph by declaring, "Students must learn to want the truth, not just profit and recognition." I couldn't agree more; Wolff should begin the campaign for academic honesty by her own more careful attention to "truth."

Sanford E. Gaines
professor of law

Letters to the editor are welcome from all members of the UH community and should focus on issues, not personalities. Letters must be typed and must include the author's name, telephone number and affiliation with the University. Anonymous letters will not be published. Letters are subject to editing for clarity, language and space. Letters may be delivered in person to Room 151, Communication; e-mailed to dclettrs@mail.uh.edu ; or faxed to (713) 743-5384.