opinions
editors: josh higgins, shawn ghuman opinionseditor@collegiatetimes.com/ 540.231.9865
march 27, 2013 COLLEGIATETIMES
3
The Collegiate Times is an independent student-run newspaper serving the Virginia Tech community since 1903 Collegiate Times Editorial Staff
MCT CAMPUS
Our Views [staff editorial]
Supreme Court should rule in favor of same-sex marriage, promote equality T he Supreme C ou r t hea r i ng oral arguments on challenges to the Defense of Marriage Act Ca lifornia’s Proposition 8, both of which address samesex marriage issues, provides America the opportunity to extend rights to everyone in society. As of now, same-sex marriage couples do not receive the same rights heterosexual couples receive — and given that the U.S. Constitution states that all men
are created equal, it is important that all Americans receive the same rights. As the Supreme Court decides on the cases for same-sex marriage, it should recognize that banning same-sex marriage is inequality under the law and is unconstitutional. Allowing same-sex marriage is a huge step toward equality in the United States, and the Supreme Court should act accordingly.
what you’re saying Have we not learned from History? Arming rebels might not be the best answer Anonymous: Soon we wont be arming rebels, they’ll be arming themselves. With advancements in 3D printing its very possible to have weapons manufacturing within homes by the end of the decade. Already we see working ammo clips and designers are making great strides in designing assault weapons made from resin and plastics. The internet is leading the way for people to produce weapons and order ammunition to supply themselves for any revolutionary need. The internet is a great equalizer
Upper Quad renovation project and Transportation Institute expansion both approved by BOV Anonymous: The Virginia Tech Transportation Institute (Institute) is one of seven university level research institutes at Virginia Tech. The Institute was established in August 1988 in response to the U.S. Department of Transportation’s University Transportation Centers Program, and in cooperation with the Virginia Department of Transportation. The Institute’s mission is primarily applied to research, accomplished via a multidisciplinary core of academic faculty housed in cooperating departments, research faculty, and students. The Institute is currently housed in a 52,000 square foot office and laboratory complex. The Institute is a critical research engine for the university with over 130 research projects, a $125 million total research portfolio, and $30 million of annual research expenditures. The university’s vision to expand research and development under the Institute is a key strategic initiative for the future. The Institute has grown to fill its current space and the program is expanding further with new research grants and contracts. The Institute requested additional space at their existing site near the Smart Road to accommodate this growth and has worked with the Corporate Research Center (CRC) to design and build a solution. The scope of the expansion includes approximately 24,400 gross square feet of office space and 6,400 gross square feet of warehouse space with an expected total cost of not more than $5.3 million.
Dance needs larger venue L ast Tuesday, many in the Class of 2014 found themselves without tickets to the Ring Dance, including yours truly. The administration would have us blame the “university and state marshal” for the limited number of tickets, but event planners are the true culprits here. Since April 1934, when the Class of 1935 held the first Ring Dance, the event has been a can’t-miss transition between junior and senior years. It is an important component of university fellowship, representing the most sophisticated example of interaction between the Corps of Cadets and the civilian student body. Why, then, is Ring Dance held at a venue — Squires Student Center — that cannot accommodate all members of a particular year’s class? It’s not like Ring Dance has always been held at Squires. In fact, Ring Dance has been held at three different venues. That first Ring Dance in 1934 was held at War Memorial Hall, where the event took place, with
few exceptions, until 1969. That year, Ring Dance was moved to its current location in Squires. Ring Dance was also moved to Cassell Coliseum from 1989 to 1991, when Squires underwent renovations. The venue was smaller, but circumstances necessitated the move. Correspondingly, I can think of no more pressing circumstance to change the Ring Dance venue than the denial of many juniors’ participation in the event. As class sizes keep growing, Virginia Tech should realize that the Commonwealth Ballroom has become an inadequate location for Ring Dance. It can neither fit all juniors nor provide students at the event enough room to enjoy themselves. I have heard countless complaints from friends about the overcrowded nature of the whole event, and how uncomfortable it was. Ring Dance should be a gala-style affair; it should not resemble a cramped Saturday night house party. The best solution for Ring Dance would be a return to War Memorial Hall. Its four massive basketball courts provide excel-
lent spaces to hold the event. Some might say that such a location would look too much like a high school gym, where some schools’ senior proms might be held. However, enough decorations and a winning interior design could likely mitigate those perceptions. Interestingly, next year will be the 80th anniversary of Ring Dance. Would it not be the ultimate affirmation of tradition to hold Ring Dance where it all began? The Holtzman Alumni Center could serve as another option. Its ballrooms provide an elegant venue for holding such a prestigious event as Ring Dance. Wherever Ring Dance is held next March, let’s hope the entire Class of 2015 has an opportunity to be a part of the festivities. Let’s make Ring Dance an inclusive event, rather than exclusive one. HECTOR QUESADA -regular columnist -political science -junior
Statistics belittle women’s progress
N
ext month, brace yourself for another round of grumbling about gender discrimination in the workplace. April 9 is Equal Pay Day, supposedly the magic point at which women finally make what men made in the previous year. The National Committee for Pay Equity, citing a Census Bureau number, says earnings for women are “statistically unchanged,” with women receiving only 77 percent of men’s earnings. The figure for the previous year was 77.4 percent. What many people don’t know is that this is a cherrypicked number and the idea that it’s an accurate measure of discrimination is grossly misleading. While workplace unfairness hasn’t been banished, studies that correct for such factors as life choices and family situation show that discrimination today is minimal at best, and in some cases has reversed — with women making more than men. President Barack Obama has repeated the 77 percent number as if it were written in stone. In his recent State of the Union address, he called on Congress to “declare that women should earn a living equal to their efforts.” Supporting documents made public by the White House referenced the 77 percent number, saying that “on average women generally make 23 cents on the dollar less than men.” Glenn
Kessler, the fact check guy at The Washington Post, gave this issue a good workout last year, revealing that all of the paygap numbers derived from government statistics have serious limitations. The number used for Equal Pay Day comes from the Census Bureau and is based on annual wages, a broad measure that captures categories such as bonuses and investment income. But it doesn’t account properly for jobs that only run for part of a calendar year, such as teaching. Teachers, many of them women, may not work in the summer. Because women generally work fewer hours than men, annual wages is a very poor measure of gender discrimination. The Bureau of Labor Statistics uses weekly wages, which is a bit better, but it leaves out bonuses and the like. Using this measure, BLS says women’s earnings are 81.2 percent of men’s. The government also looks at this from an hourly wage standpoint, and here the pay gap shrinks even more: Women make 86 percent of what men make. But with this number, too, there’s a problem: Hourly wages don’t measure pay for salaried workers. And as Kessler notes, “under this metric for people with a college degree, there is virtually no pay gap at all.” In fact, in some instances, women are making more than men. Writing in The Wall Street Journal, Carrie Lukas of the
conservative Independent Women’s Forum cited a 2010 study by the Reach Advisors research firm, which found that for single, childless urban workers ages 22-30, women’s pay outpaced men’s by 8 percent. As Lukas remarked, that makes sense, given the greater educational attainment of women and the increase over the years in “knowledge-based” jobs. Kessler cited a report by the St. Louis Federal Reserve Bank, which looked over the research on this subject and concluded that when women are compared with men in similar circumstances, the actual gender gap is much lower than “the raw wage gap.” Fed researchers cited a Labor Department report, which concluded that when you correct for such differences, the hourly wage gap drops to about 5 cents. Groups such as the National Committee for Pay Equity are doing a disservice by exaggerating the extent of workplace discrimination, apparently in the hope of generating more resentment and creating pressure for more costly federal regulation. Workplace discrimination may not have vanished but it’s wrong to suggest women have made so little progress. Even in a labor market free of discrimination, the pay gap number may never fully close. E. THOMAS MCLANAHAN -mcclatchy newspapers
Editor in Chief: Michelle Sutherland Managing Editor: Nick Cafferky Design Editors: Andrea Ledesma, Alicia Tillman Special Section Design Edtitor: Danielle Buynak Public Editor: Erin Chapman Web Editor: Chelsea Gunter Senior News Editor: Mallory NoePayne Associate News Editors: Priscilla Alvarez, Dean Seal News Blog Editor: Cameron Austin News Reporters: Leslie McCrea, Justin Graves, Andrew Kulak, Donal Murphy News Staff Writers: Alex Gomez, Sean Hayden, Max Luong, Cody Owens, Features Editors: Emma Goddard, Nick Smirniotopoulos Features Staff Writers: Ben Kim, Katie White, Kara Van Scoyc, Allie Sivak, Jacob Wilbanks Senior Opinions Editor: Josh Higgins Associate Opinions Editor: Shawn Guhman Sports Editors: Matt Jones, Zach Mariner Special Sections Editor: Chelsea Giles Copy Chief: Nora McGann Copy Editors: Allison Hedrick, Kristin Gunther, Mackenzie Fallon, Alexis Livingston, Kayleigh McKenzie Photo Editor: Kevin Dickel Collegiate Times Business Staff Business Manager: James Dean Seal Circulation Manager: Keith Bardsley Student Publications Photo Staff Director of Photography: Brad Klodowski Lab Manager: Trevor White College Media Solutions Assistant Ad Director: Carla Craft Account Executives: Robert Alberti, Taylor Moran Inside Sales Manager: Amanda Gawne Assistant Account Executives: Catie Stockdale Jordan Williams, Elizabeth Dam, Emily Daugherty Creative Director: Diana Bayless Assistant Creative Director: Nik Aliye Creative Staff: Mariah Jones, Samantha Keck
Voice your opinion. Readers are encouraged to send letters to the Collegiate Times. 365 Squires Student Center Blacksburg, VA, 24061 Fax: (540) 231-9151 opinionseditor@collegiatetimes.com All letters to the editor must include a name and daytime phone number. Students must include year and major. Faculty and staff must include position and department. All other submissions must include city of residence, and if applicable, relationship to Virginia Tech (i.e., alumni, parent, etc.). All letters should be in MS Word (.doc) format, if possible. Letters, commentaries and editorial cartoons do not reflect the views of the Collegiate Times. Editorials are written by the Collegiate Times editorial board, which is composed of the opinions editors, editor-in-chief and the managing editors. Letters to the editor are submissions from Collegiate Times readers. We reserve the right to edit for any reason. Anonymous letters will not be printed. Have a news tip? Call or text 200-TIPS or e-mail newstips@collegiatetimes.com Collegiate Times Newsroom 231-9865 Editor-in-Chief 231-9867 College Media Solutions Advertising 961-9860 The Collegiate Times, a division of the Educational Media Company at Virginia Tech, was established in 1903 by and for the students of Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. The Collegiate Times is published every Tuesday through Friday of the academic year except during exams and vacations. The Collegiate Times receives no direct funding from the university. The Collegiate Times can be found online at www.collegiatetimes.com. Except where noted, all photographs were taken by the Student Publications Photo Staff. To order a reprint of a photograph printed in the Collegiate Times, visit reprints.collegemedia.com. The first copy is free, any copy of the paper after that is 50 cents per issue. © Collegiate Times, 2012. All rights reserved. Material published in the Collegiate Times is the property thereof, and may not be reprinted without the express written consent of the Collegiate Times.