A9
Alyssa Pajarillo, editor
VIEWPOINTS
Nov 17, 2016 — Vol. 60, Issue 3
Tel: (619) 482-6368 e-mail: viewpoints@theswcsun.com
Students ignore scholarships By Alejandro Muñoz Anguiano A perspective
VIC R TO N SA AN DT DE f af st
R/
Legions of college students are walking away from free money. Eight of 10 Southwestern College students are on financial aid, but most ignore scholarships. SWC administrators recently extended the scholarship application deadline, giving students even more time to apply. A report by the Federal Advisory Committee on Student Financial Assistance said 28 percent of students earning less than $10,000 put in more than 30 hours per week. Students who work long hours risk having their studies suffer. The College Board found that less than 60 percent of aid-eligible community college students even complete the FAFSA, but students who care to look for scholarships will find opportunities abound, varying from small stipends to five figure sums. Even a $200 scholarship could put a dent in the cost of rent or groceries. Not every scholarship requires a stellar GPA. The Gen and Kelly Tanabe Scholarship does not even require students to submit a GPA. Financial difficulties can start a vicious cycle. Students who work too may hours may find their GPA dropping below the threshold for larger scholarships. SWC needs to put more effort into advertising scholarships and encouraging
struggling students to apply. Students need to make the effort to apply. It is not too difficult. SWC has done a very good job making scholarship applications painless. These scholarships do exist, but students are not often aware of them. And it is not always just about the money. Earning a scholarship may encourage struggling students to focus more on their studies. SWC’s
AcademicWorks scholarship application system simplifies the process for students to apply for many campus scholarships with just one form, though some may require a few additional questions. Qualifying students may apply for up to 11 scholarships with this form, though some do require additional questions.
Young community college students new to academia often do not have a network of teachers or employers to write letters of recommendation. At SWC this problem is made worse by the predominance of part-time instructors. About 80 percent of SWC instructors are adjunct instructors who do not have office space or time to meet with students. They can be difficult to contact outside of class, which makes it difficult for students to build a working relationship and earn that letter of recommendation. Still, students should make the effort. Big money is out there for the taking, such as the Jack Kent Cooke Foundation Undergraduate Transfer Scholarship, which provides up to $40,000 annually for up to three years to students transferring to four-year institutions. Winners are also eligible for a $50,000-a-year graduate scholarship once they have earned undergraduate degrees. Only 2,061 transfer students in the U.S. applied for the 2015 JKCF scholarship. Eligible students should take more interest. That is seriously life-changing financial support. SWC students who miss the Fall 2016 round of scholarships should be prepared to apply in the Spring. Unless, of course, they are independently wealthy and do not need the money.
‘Rapist loophole’ finally closed By Katy Stegall A perspective
Rapists have for years avoided prison sentences on a technicality, only to rape again. Their free ride is over. A bill to mandate prison sentences for all convicted rapists was introduced by two California legislators after Brock Turner, the Stanford rapist, was sentenced to six months in jail, but only served three. Assembly Bill 2888 was approved 66-0 by the Assembly and signed by Governor Jerry Brown. National outrage fired a policy change to close the “rapist loophole” that predators like Turner have slipped through for years. Prior to AB2888 a sexual assault was not considered rape unless penile penetration occurred. Turner said he had inserted his fingers inside of the unconscious victim, according to the incident report, but nothing else. Without judicial discretion, the power a judge has to act on their personal judgment, Turner might have received a prison sentence. Essentially, a trusty sidekick of judge like Aaron Persky could decide to go easy on criminals they favor. America’s most despised judge is facing recall while his unjust decision still sickens people. Some in the legal community say that Turner’s six-month sentence is an act of misogyny by Persky. “Judge Persky is biased in favor of privileged athletes convicted of violent crimes against women,” wrote Michele Dauber, a Stanford law professor. Turner violated the victim as well as a handful of laws, such as Penal Code 261 and PC289. Both charges against PC261 were dropped, as Turner’s fingers were not legally considered to be sexual intercourse. By legal accounts, he is not a rapist. Antiquated laws worked in favor of Turner. Until society’s outdated perceptions about rape move into the 21st century, rapists can use Turner as a twisted role model for how to get away with sexual assault. Assemblyman Evan Low is one of the authors of AB2888. Low said a clear statement needs to be made to say that sexual assault is unacceptable. Santa Clara County District Attorney Jeff Rosen agreed. “This bill is about more than the sentence, it’s about supporting victims and changing the culture on our college campuses to help prevent future crimes,” Rosen said. It is despicable that Turner’s joke of a jail sentence was the catalyst to policy change in California, but at least some good came out of the evil act. Prior to AB2888 courts meted out a less severe punishment for unconscious victims than the conscious ones. Victims who do not use defensive force against their attackers decrease their chances of having the rapist charged to the highest degree. Californians are not the only Americans enraged by the sentencing. Upon Turner’s release, protestors stood outside his parent’s home in Ohio with signs suggesting an “eye for an eye” type of punishment. Sometimes the apple does not fall far from the tree. Dan Turner, father of the rapist, said his son’s life should not be altered forever over 20 minutes of action. What his enabling father did not take into accord was what affect those 20 minutes had on the victim. She does not recall the event, but painfully remembers coming to in
Karen Agbuya/staff
the hospital with torn underwear and pine needle-riddled hair. Our judicial system goes easy on people accused of sexual assault and is hard on his victims. This goes beyond lazy judges such as Persky. Defense attorneys often act as the wolf in a wool suit. Attorneys defending rapists too often smear the victim, and humiliate women on the witness stand. Shouse Law, a West Coast criminal defense law group, actually tells potential clients how to get out of a sexual assault charge on its website. A short video explaining how to slip the charges is the first “helpful tip” for sexual criminals. “Rape, like all other California sex crimes, is a charge that is often initiated out of jealousy, revenge, anger, or another emotionally-driven motives,” the website says. Misogynistic undertones seep through the words. Shouse Law advertising boasts of the firm’s ability to reduce charges and prove the accuser is committing fraud. Turner is not the only famous rapist of 2016. Bill Cosby, former comedian and sitcom star, has been accused by more than 50 women of sexual misconduct often after drugging them. Due to a statute of limitations, he is only being charged with three counts of aggravated indecent assault. President-elect Donald Trump has also been charged with sexual assault by a growing legion of women. Democratic Senator Connie Leyva said she introduced SB 813, the Justice for Victims Act, so victims can always have the opportunity to seek justice in court after such a violent act. Changing society’s rape culture goes beyond enforcing a new law that closes the loophole. In order for a society to embrace the idea that the victim is never at fault for rape, the blame-the-victim mindset needs to be destroyed. Ambulance-chasing lawyers are not the only ones guilty of blaming the victim. Cops blame the victim when they ask, “What were you wearing?” Victims are also typically asked, “What did you do to provoke them?” as if it were their fault. Until authorities make an effort to let rapists know they will pay for their crimes, rape culture will continue to
MARTIN LOFTIN/staff
Prop 59 is a message to take corporate greed out of political campaigns By Martin Loftin A perspective
The United States Supreme Court effectively legalized bribery in 2010. In a 5-4 vote, Citizens United v. Federal Election Commission decided that the freedom of speech that applied to living Americans now also applied to non-living corporations. This prohibited the government from restricting independent political expenditures of corporations and unions. Since Citizens United, politicians have become beholden to the desires of their donors and Congress has become a machine that trades political favors for huge donations. Elected officials need to represent the interests of the constituents and California Proposition 59 is a step in the right direction. Prop 59 was passed with 52 percent of the vote and Donald Trump has won the presidency, this should signal to lawmakers that it is in their best interest to help get money out of politics. Democrats put all their money on the corporatist candidate and paid with it in the House and Senate. Trump initially ran his presidential bid as an outsider crusading against corruption in campaign finance laws who proved that he was different from the political elite from Washington D.C., but that message got muddled among all his other stances on policy. When the Supreme Courts said, “independent expenditures, including those made by corporations, do not give rise to corruption or the appearance of corruption,” they were purposefully enabling political corruption by making it extremely difficult to prove collusion between PACs, candidates and campaigns. Dr. Jill Stein of the Green Party, might have failed to get the required five percent of the popular vote that would have qualified her party to receive matched federal funding, but had filed a complaint to the Federal Election Committee over Clinton’s and Trump’s illegal coordination with their super-PACs. “Independent expenditures” are defined as money spent by a person to influence voters with no coordination with a candidate or campaign, but in December 2014 former Florida Governor Jeb Bush was able to work directly with his super PAC Right to Rise because he had not officially declared his candidacy. Since money became equated to free speech, politicians have learned to only listen to the loudest voices. Super PACs have already spent $64 million on the 2016 presidential race, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, and the total could top $100 million. California voters have the opportunity to lead the fight against money in politics with
Proposition 59. It would direct California’s elected officials to use all of their constitutional authority – including amending the Constitution – to: •Reverse the effects of Citizens United and related court decisions. •Allow the regulation and limitation of political campaign spending. •Ensure individuals are able to express political views. •Make clear that corporations should not have the same constitutional rights as people. Prop 59 is an advisory measure, but it declares the people’s will to get dark money out of politics. California has company. Many states have similar initiatives. Corporations might enjoy the right of free speech (without being able to speak), but they are not treated like people in the eyes of the law. When a person breaks a law, they are punished according to the crime, but when corporations break the law the punishment is rarely worse than a simple fine. No human is too big to jail, but corporations are. Corporate interests chose Clinton and sabotaged Bernie Sanders, who was polled to defeat Trump by 15 points, during the primaries and forced a weak Democratic candidate through. Corporate interests (re: greed) have stalled the development of the United States. Moneyed special interests damage the country and sand down its competitive edge in return for obscene profits. Corporations and the 1 percent super-rich of America and other nations have successfully lobbied Congress to lower their taxes and shift the burden onto the rest of the population – including the poor and working class. America would have an extra $166.7 billion annually to spend on free college, green technology and rebuilding crumbling infrastructure if corporations paid taxes at the same rate they did during the Reagan Administration. Corporations have made $13.1 trillion in the last seven years, but have only paid $3 trillion in taxes, according to figures by the Commerce Department. That $10.1 trillion does not trickle down like The Rich would like us to believe. Vast tax savings are hoarded by corporations in foreign bank accounts and invested in buying the next election. One of the only categories where the United States is still solidly “Number One” is in mass shootings, despite huge public support for more gun control. Thanks to the National Rifle Association super PAC, which spent $2.5 million lobbying in 2016, it is unlikely that any gun control legislation will ever see the floor of the Congress, especially now that the Republicans have taken the House and Senate. Money talks, even if corporations do not.