Say No to Student Fees

When it comes to campus life injustices, student fees rank high on any list. On most campuses across the country a mandatory student fee is assessed to each student at the beginning of the year. A portion of this fee, which may be several hundred dollars, will go toward funding various political, religious, and interest groups. 

A college requiring you to support groups espousing ideas which you are fundamentally opposed to is most certainly committing injustice. At Intellectual Takeout, we are opposed to funding interest groups' activities with student fees. Should anyone be surprised that tempers flare when money is taken from Muslims and atheists to fund Christian groups like Campus Crusade? Should anyone be surprised that tempers flare when money is taken from conservatives and libertarians to fund the International Socialist Organization? Of course not. Everyone should recognize the injustice.

Sadly, those sorts of things happen regularly on campuses across the country. On occasion, the amount of money various student-led interest groups receive is often in the tens of thousands of dollars range. Some even receive close to $100,000.

There are those who argue that, as long as the schools are taking money from students and redistributing it to various student-led interest groups that conservative and libertarian student groups should get a slice of the pie. Many others argue that taking the money corrupts the conservative or libertarian student group by diminishing the credibility of the message. Whatever your position, if you are interested in reading more about the nuances of redistributing student fees (and you should), the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (FIRE) has a very thoughtful piece available here.

This topic is not a new one and has been battled out in the courts on a number of occasions. And while the courts have continued to uphold the constitutionality of mandatory student fees funding student-led interest groups at public universities, there is still action you can take.

We propose that you push for the elimination of using student fees to fund political, religious, or other interest groups on your public or private college campus. How you do this will depend upon on your school's governance. Potentially, students may be able vote on how student fees are distributed. Before you can put together a petition to change student fee distribution, you're going to have to win the hearts and minds of your fellow students. You'll have to write letters to the editor, start discussion groups, pass out literature, and do informal polling on the issue to raise awareness. Once you do a petition, even if it fails, keep going. Your effort will continue to get the issue in front of other students.

Entrenched interest groups are never easy to dislodge. Once an organization realizes that it can get easy money by force, it won't let go easily. You can expect the same on campus. Groups getting funds will likely oppose you, maybe even some supposedly conservative or libertarian groups. Through it all keep your chin up and remember that justice is on your side. And, of course, let Intellectual Takeout know what you're up to. If we can, we're happy to help.

 

 

 

More About This Topic...

Click thumbnails below to view links

Quote Page

Commentary or Blog Post

"At least three companies linked by the Environmental Protection Agency to hazardous waste sites are being paid by the government to clean up their own sites, according to an investigation by the Center for Public Integrity."

"In sum, Superfund is not an effective way to reduce health risks. It reduced the traditional protections that people and companies can expect from legal due process, and it hasn't clearly helped anybody, except lawyers, consultants, and the EPA. Much the same has been shown to be true of many other regulatory programs. ...

Is there another way? Yes. The traditional way of dealing with...

"When one thinks of a Superfund site, the image is of a large landfill, a former mining pit, or an industrial site like Love Canal; places where massive contamination has released into the air, ground, or water over many, many years and where it is not safe to live, animals and benthic organisms may not even exist, and where the full power of the federal government is often needed simply to...

Sapien looks into the 114 toxic waste sites that, according to the EPA, are "not under control" and pose dangers to human health.  However, as Sapien points out, the EPA has been extremely evasive when outsiders (including U.S. Senators) ask for location and specific status of these sites.

What impact does Superfund have on real people? Robert Cox retells the story of how Superfund destroyed his business, a business he worked to build for 20 years.

"'We are facing a wide range of environmental problems, including the severe threats to our well being posed by climate change and water and air pollution,' Greenstone said. 'The findings suggest that less ambitious clean-ups like the erection of fences, posting of warning signs around the sites, and simple containment of toxics would free up resources to address environmental problems that...

This article discusses the problems with Superfund in the wake of reform efforts.

Chart or Graph

"Sites on the NPL are also categorized by types of industrial facilities or activities associated with the contamination, such as manufacturing, waste management, and recycling."

"Eleven companies received the most money in cost-plus contracts from the Environmental Protection Agency from fiscal years 1998 to 2005."

"The Superfund process begins when a potentially hazardous site is reported to EPA, usually by a state environmental agency, but sometimes by local or Tribal governments, individuals, and community groups."

This chart shows the number of sites proposed, deleted, finalized, and completed each fiscal year on the National Priorities List.

This chart shows the amounts of Superfund expenditures on administrative and programmatic costs for fiscal years 1999 through 2003.

The Hazard Ranking System (HRS) [shown above] is a numerically based screening system that evaluates five categories of concerns at each site.

"Figure II-8, from GAO's 2002 report on the Superfund Program, illustrates EPA's Superfund Program expenditures in FY 2002 for everything except expenditures to ORD and OIG."

"The total annual appropriation (including congressional earmarks) to the Superfund Program from 1993 to 2004 is shown in Figure II-7...."

Analysis Report White Paper

Tresch provides an excellent overview of the history of federal environmental law since 1970, the role of Superfund, and an assessment of Superfund.

Through interviews and a survey, this study examines Wisconsin's efforts to reform Superfund. Its background section provides a good introduction to the unintended negative outcomes of Superfund.

"The Clean Water Act and CERCLA should be revised so that liability attaches only if a new site owner leaves the site in worse condition than before. Such a law would encourage additional mining and additional cleanup."

This detailed study of, "the local welfare impacts of Superfund clean-ups of hazardous waste sites", ultimately concludes, "Overall, the preferred estimates suggest that the local benefits of Superfund clean-ups are small and appear to be substantially lower than the $43 million mean cost of Superfund clean-ups."

This article offers a comprehensive assessment of the cost-effectiveness of a selection of Superfund cleanups. The results reveal that many EPA Superfund remediations fail a partial benefit-cost test.

This report provides a critical analysis of Superfund and discusses possible ways to reform it.

Video/Podcast/Media

Lois Gibbs founded The Center for Health, Environment and Justice, an environmental grassroots group. While the video is edited, it gives a fascinating account from a resident affected by the hazardous waste at Love Canal. From a property rights/free market perspective, it's interesting to note that various levels of government took little to no action to uphold the property rights of the...

Primary Document

This report provides a detailed summary of the law authorizing the Superfund program.

"The National Oil and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan (NCP) defines the organizational structure and procedures for preparing for and responding to discharges of oil and releases of hazardous substances, pollutants, and contaminants in the United States. The NCP was developed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in response to the congressional enactment of The...

This very large report, prepared by the National Advisory Council for Environmental Policy and Technology (NACEPT), provides mountains of information regarding program expenditures, development of new sites for the National Priority List (NPL), history of the Superfund and NPL, progress, success and failure, cost effectiveness, and other deep analysis information. NACEPT is an independent...

In 1993, the EPA set out to reform Superfund and, in subsequent years, it has instituted 62 reforms. This GAO study assesses the effectiveness EPA reforms and concludes that the majority are not working, and that while progress may have been made, recent trends suggest progress may be eroding.

Books

Link