Who would take sophomore council’s seats if they resigned?
To the editor:
I’d like to add an unvoiced opinion to the Sophomore Class Council debate. It has little to do with the content of the newsletter and more about those who have called for the officers’ resignations.
First of all, for better or for worse, SU Class Council incumbency is a fact of life. How many members seeking reelection are ever challenged, much less lose? Yes, those who condemn the sophomore newsletter are correct in doing so. It’s entirely warranted; it was a horrible mistake to print it. But, honestly, if the Sophomore Class Council were to resign, who would take their place?
Virtually all of the points in the countless letters to the editor have been undeniably valid, but let’s not use the argument that these positions are highly sought after, tooth-and-nail-type positions. Class Council elections (and most elections at WU, for that matter) are rarely competitive. The letters to the editor that have been aghast that “we *elected* these people!” conveniently ignore that, regardless of whether Class Councils do an excellent job (as they often do) or a poor one, there was probably only one name on the ballot.
Also, those that have written in have claimed that the apology was too vague, but at this point, would anything positive really be accomplished by publicly throwing a cabinet member who wrote the offensive content to the wolves? Students must actively run if they want change.
Obviously, publishing the newsletter was a huge error and gigantic oversight, from any perspective. At the same time, it is all too easy to sit behind a Word document and sling denunciations. I’ve yet to see a letter to the editor from someone who is eager to serve in their place.
Brian Eufinger
Class of 2004
The parents don’t actually cheat the college financial aid system
To the Editor:
I must correct three egregious and potentially libelous factual errors that appeared in your April 8 story, “Parents cheat system to pay college tuition.” In so doing, I hope to provide an important lesson for your student journalists.
Error One: The story refers to the “National Institute of College Planners,” which to my knowledge does not exist. I believe the reporter may have been referring to the National Institute of Certified College Planners (NICCP), of which I am executive director. If the reporter had been curious enough to consult the Internet, she may have found our Web site (www.niccp.com), along with the correct name.
Error Two: The story accuses the wrongly-named organization of “tactics” to assist parents who are “able to overlook the ethical issues” of cheating colleges out of financial assistance dollars. Again, if the reporter had checked our Web site, she would have found that the NICCP offers training and certification for financial planners seeking accreditation as Certified College Planning Specialists (CCPSs). This training includes essential and comprehensive information on all aspects of planning and saving for college-from financial aid to qualified tuition programs, Coverdell accounts, stocks, bonds, mutual funds, etc. It is designed to help financial planners find the best solutions for parents who face the obligation of concurrently saving for their children’s education and their own retirement. To suggest that our mission is to teach parents to “circumvent” laws and “rip off” colleges is a gross injustice.
Error Three (this is the important one for budding journalists): The previous two errors could have been avoided completely if your reporter had bothered to contact us. Instead, she apparently borrowed most of her information from a recent Wall Street Journal story that contained similar factual errors (the Journal reporter did contact us for her story but got the organization’s name and mission wrong anyway; even the world’s best newspapers make mistakes).
Timothy M. Hayes
Executive Director
National Institute of Certified College Planners
Pittsford, NY