C A L I F O R N I A
S T A T E
U N I V E R S I T Y ,
F U L L E R T O N
INSIDE Not all college courses go 3 nonOPINION: to enrich the learning experince
Women’s volleyball sweeps Columbia University 3-0
News: American culture may affect the 6 neating patterns of new immigrants
—see Sports page 5
T u e s d ay
Vo l u m e 7 1 , I s s u e 3 5
N o v e m b e r 7, 2000
Prop. to provide funds for schools nELECTION: If passed, bonds would need to be approved by a 55 percent vote By Barbara Lake
Daily Titan Production Manager
Photo Illustration BY Mayra Beltran/Daily Titan
Many of today’s young people choose not to vote, leaving the choice for their futures in the hands of others.
Young voter apathy will hurt election turnout
nPOLITICS: About one-third of young voters participated in the last presidential election By Matt Capuano
Daily Titan Staff Writer Ever since 18-year-olds gained the right to vote in 1972, voter turnout for this age group has been relatively low. The youth, 18 to 30, are 25 percent of the voting population in this country and can have a major impact on this upcoming presidential election. This belief is not lost on any of the candidates past and present. Since 1972 the youth vote has been an essential part of the presidential race. There is one problem in this whole scenario: the youth have been coming out in extremely low numbers every election. In an effort to get more youths involved in their futures, many organizations have mobilized in getting the information out and to get as many young people registered to vote in the process. Some examples include MTV’s Choose or Lose and Youth Vote 2000. Since the 1992 election,
MTV has been trying to raise issues with the youth of this country. They have organized debates with questions by the youth, in order to convince more people to get into the voting booths. The World Wrestling Federation has also been involved this year’s election and trying to get the youth to exercise their rights as American citizens. They have even invited the candidates for a debate on “WWF Smackdown,” their Thursday night show. They promote the youth to participate in their government and to “Smackdown the Vote.” However, registering someone to vote doesn’t guarantee that they will vote. The WWF is proud of having registered more people to vote through their efforts. According to the U.S. Census Bureau, only 32.4 percent of the nation’s registered voters ages 18 to 24 voted in the 1996 presidential election. The sad part of this whole equation is that this low turnout of young voters has become commonplace every election. Many experts have tried to figure out why the younger generation just doesn’t seem to make an effort to vote. The answer is actually quite simple. “It’s just not a political generation,” said Phillip L. Gianos, professor of political science at Cal State
Fullerton. “If the economy was bad or the draft was still in effect, more youth will show up. It’s just that there are no issues that concern youth.” Despite this apparent lack of relevant issues focused toward youth, some students are still planning to vote. “There may not be very many issues that apply to me, but I’m still going to vote. I feel that it is my right,” said criminal justice major Kristina Hoff. “Down the road, some of the issues may actually affect me.” Despite efforts to encourage more youth to vote, some people are still very negative about the whole process. “I’m not going to vote, because I don’t like either candidate,” said computer science major Chris Adams. “I feel that it would just be a waste of time.” In light of this, the main question that should be asked is whether the candidates are doing a good job of getting in touch with the youth. “The candidates have been trying to raise interest in the youth, but it is a tough sell,” Gianos said. “After a while, it is like beating your head against the wall. “This close to the election, the candidates are interested in mobilizing, not converting.”
Proposition 39 will attempt to amend the Education Code section regarding charter school facilities, but it would have an affect on all public schools. It would require each local kindergarten through 12th-grade school district to provide charter school facilities sufficient to accommodate each charter school’s students. Charter schools are independent public schools formed by teachers, parents and other individuals or groups that are exempt from most state laws and regulations affecting public schools. Voters have varying opinions on their stance regarding Proposition 39, which is on today’s ballot. Proponents of Proposition 39 say that the initiative for this measure provides authorization for bonds for the repair and replacement of school facilities and classrooms, if passed bonds would only need to be approved by 55 percent vote instead of the current two-thirds vote of the local electorate. Opponents say the two-thirds requirement protects a minority of homeowners from property tax increases caused by a majority of renters. “I don’t want to be taxed anymore, I think taxes are high enough as it is,” said sociology student Laura Villegas. Villegas is a homeowner and said that the proposition would raise property taxes if it passed. Child and adolescent studies student, Rhoda Fehrenbach, said she is going to vote in favor of the proposition because she feels that if it passes, less people (55 percent) will vote on the bonds rather than two-thirds, making the process for school repairs quicker. “Not too many different opinions will
make the decisions,” she said. Fehrenbach added that the proposition would give state government greater flexibility in approving school bonds. “People trust public schools enough but they don’t always meet everyone’s needs. Some kids are over challenged and others are not challenged enough,” she said. “The proposition will put more new things to be OK’d in school districts by local electorates.” Liberal studies student, Jenny Cheng, said she is also in favor of Proposition 39 because she believes it’s for the children and betterment of schools. “If it means getting out more resources to children quicker, go for it,” Cheng said. Supporters of the proposition say California needs 20,000 new classrooms to keep up with projected school population growth in the next 10 years. Public administration student, Rosalinda Flores, said she would vote yes on the proposition because the process of bond approval will be quicker. She added that it wouldn’t make a big difference to homeowners if the proposition passed because property taxes are low anyway. In contrast to Flores' opinion, communications student, Lyn Jordan, said she was unsure of what she was going to vote for regarding Proposition 39 because she felt the bond approval process would be slower. Jordan said she thought the proposition’s negative aspects were that it might take longer to get the projects done. “It [Proposition 39] might take longer because it will not lie in the hands of the administrators who have the day-to-day interaction and it will put it in the hands of the community, who might not have the day-to-day interaction with students and facilities,” Jordan said. Graduate student Noh Yoong-Jae said he believes the proposition ensures the commitment of quality to the children’s education, by lowering voter approval rate from 66 percent to 55 percent in bonds. “California ranks 47th in public
PROPOSITION/ 2
Mayra Beltran/Daily Titan
Several of the local schools in the area will receive funds from prop 39
Sociology professor seeks seat in the state Assembly nELECTION: CSUF’s G. Nanjundappa will run for the 72nd District By Rita Freeman
Daily Titan Asst. News Editor
Mayra Beltran/Daily Titan
Sociology Professor G. Nanjundappa is running for state assembly seat representing several north Orange County cities.
She remembers how nervous he was at a recent debate at the Brea Community Center. But Natasha Perez, a political science major, said she was very impressed at how G. Nanjundappa, Cal State Fullerton sociology professor and the Democratic candidate for the 72nd District researched all the topics important to the people. “It [the debate] was a really relaxed atmosphere, but he looked so nervous and he said he had butterflies in his stomach,” said Perez, who has helped research and critique debates for Nanjun’s campaign. “He gave facts and figures, and that showed me that he worked hard.” Reaching out to the people and speaking about the issues is the goal of Nanjudappa, or Nanjun as his friends know him, during his race for the seat in the Assembly of the 72nd District.
“I think he is dynamic and I agree with almost every principle he is fighting for,” said History Professor Leland Bellot. “He has made a tireless effort to get his message across. He believes in what he is doing.” The major issues that Nanjundappa is fighting for are to improve the quality of education, promote access and quality health care, provide affordable housing and childcare, and improve the public transportation system by reducing traffic conditions, improving safety and reducing pollution. “The message to people is that my commitment is to improve the quality of life, secure a better future for them all,” Nanjun said. Another issue is the development of a regional mass transportation system by bringing together county and city governments. “I think that the long-range solution to the traffic problems now and in the future is to come out with a suitable and decent mass transportation system,” Nanjundappa said. The major education proposition Nanjundappa is in favor of is Proposition 39. He said that this measure would reduce bond approval by cutting the
http://dailytitan.fullerton.edu
two-thirds requirement to 55 percent and accommodate the projected growth of 300,000 students by the year 2003. “By reducing to 55 percent approval, this would enable schools districts, community colleges and the Department of Education to raise funds to build new schools and classrooms, the continuation of the class-size reduction program and help modernize and repair existing school facilities,” Nanjundappa said. Colleagues and friends call him dedicated, honest, sincere and committed. “He’s one that actually cares about the students,” said Elliot Sacks, Associated Students director of Statewide Affairs and aide to Nanjun’s campaign. “The 72nd District wants a change,” Perez said. Perez also added that Najundappa is the voice of reason and change. “He’s sincere, direct and honest, and I don’t see that in a lot of politicians these days.” Professor Tony Fellow, head of the Communications Department, said that because of the large split between the Democratic and the Republican parties in the district, the race might be difficult for him. Fellow said that demographics show
that there are 61,134 Democrats, 103,174 Republicans and 29,430 Independents in Orange County. “The ratio is 2-to-1,” Fellow said. “It is a very difficult district for a Democrat.” Though he said it is difficult, Fellow donated money to Nanjundappa’s campaign. “It is important to support friends and colleagues,” Fellow said. I think he will do a great job for the universities. One of his biggest struggles was raising enough money. But Nanjundappa said he got the job done using whatever resources his campaign team had. “Using whatever the resources, I think we did an effective job of reaching out to the people,” Nanjundappa said. Besides teaching on campus for more than 20 years, Nanjun is also the CSUF chapter California Faculty Association president. From phone banking to visiting door to door, Nanjun said that campaigning has been very demanding, but the work has not interfered with his other responsibilities. “I have managed to balance out my time for my responsibilities,” Nanjundappa said. “But I had to make sacrifices, some things like traveling and other recreational activities to devote time for campaigning.