The newly elected leaders in the House of Representatives, including Rep. Kristi Noem, have launched the most devastating legislative assault on preventative health care in American history. Just over a week ago they voted to eliminate the national family program called Title X, which has provided millions of people with preventive care since 1970.

At a time when more and more young people cannot afford health care due to increasing costs and a struggling economy, the House leadership voted to completely gut the programs that provide preventive care, including birth control, lifesaving cancer screenings, and testing for sexually transmitted infections (including HIV) to millions of people. These cuts will directly affect the family planning clinic on campus and 14 other Title X-supported clinics in South Dakota.

If they really cared about saving money, they would know that family planning programs like Title X are fiscally sound. For every public dollar invested in family planning, taxpayers save nearly $4. Yet, 240 members of Congress don’t seem to care.

This is not just a women’s issue. All students need to be aware of this attack on prevention, under the guise of “budget cuts.” Being able to remain STI and baby-free requires responsibility of all parties involved.

We need to send a message to the extreme House leadership to get back to what they promised to do 8212; create jobs and fix the American economy. I urge Senators Johnson and Thune to reject this assault on prevention and restore Title X funding to South Dakota.

Michael VanBemmel

Senior

Computer Science

This is similar to a letter I recently sent food services. I would like to thank them for contacting me to give feedback about dining options.

I will start off by saying that I have never been particularly fond of the campus dining options or being required to purchase a meal plan that is not flexible enough to fit my needs. I have, however, been willing to deal with it until recently. This year, I am living on the west side of campus, and as much as I thought the options were limited on the east side, they are more limited here. There are fewer options at Medary throughout the week, and on weekends, the only meal choices come from Grille Works or Extreme Pita which makes for boring weekend dining.

On Friday, after racing home from work in order to get to the Commons before they closed early at 6:00 pm, I was excited to see that the new inserts in the napkin dispensers touted a new message. The new inserts claim that Aramark has listened to the student body input and put new changes into effect including more weekend dining options and extended weekend hours. The following day, I returned during the supper hour, eager to see what additional options would be available only to find that Extreme Pita was closed, leaving only Grille Works as a dining option, and onion rings and cheese curds were the only prepared options available in the warmer. Needless to say, I went off campus for food.

I can not understand why we are restricted in our required meal plan options (none are small enough to meet my current needs) but not given a variety in our dining options. I sincerely hope the answer is not because of tight budgets because there are numerous areas that Aramark could cut back in order to provide a more satisfactory dining experience on campus, starting with cutting back on promotions and advertising. I see no reason to advertise and promote dining services when there is only one company providing such services.

Overall, I am disappointed that services have been extended at the Union for those students living on the east side of campus, but little or no concern has been shown on the west side. I guess those students whose input Aramark “listened” to all lived near the Union. Hopefully, in the future, Aramark will be able to provide a more convenient and well rounded dining service for ALL students who are required to purchase unreasonable meal plans.

Sara Baldwin

Early Childhood Education

As a former student and current staff member at SDSU, I was hoping to make a comment about the editorial pertaining to the decrease in parking fines next semester. As far as I can tell from the editorial, the editors believe that a fine of $10-15 would be sufficient in deterring students from parking illegally. However, the comments made in the “Jacks React” section would seem to say otherwise. At least two of the people who reacted are saying that they would love to see parking fines reduced so that they can illegally park more with less monetary consequence. In fact, three of the people who reacted stated that they were for the reduction in fees because they themselves had gotten tickets. However, it seems many people are concerned with a lack of significant parking on campus. There are simply not enough spaces. I feel that letting more people park illegally will only decrease the number of available spaces for people who have paid for those spaces. The editors believe that there will be no increase of students illegally parking, but how could there not be? If the fine is reduced to $15, it would take getting caught 16 times to equal the cost of a reserved lot decal. This would make it fiscally irresponsible to buy a decal, because let’s be honest, nobody gets caught 16 times in one semester. I beg people to understand that a parking fine is not a required cost of attending SDSU, only one for those who choose to break the rules. Why should we encourage this?

Michael D. Dunn

SDSU Microbiologist

I am excited about the potential smoking ban on campus. I would love to avoid dodging around smokers as I walk to class. I am also excited for the possible health benefits. As a nursing major I have seen the negative impact smoking has on quality of life. But I am getting ahead of myself.

I am excited that the potential ban is coming to a student vote. We as students have the opportunity to let the administration hear our collective opinion! I was disappointed to see the editorial comparing this potential ban to California’s attempt to legalize gay marriage. The two issues are on two entirely different playing fields. The problem conservatives have with gay marriage is as a moral issue. The problem the entire country has with smoking is as a public health concern. Still, I am thankful that I live in a democracy where it is acceptable and encouraged to have differing viewpoints.

The key to democracy is to let your voice be heard. That is why I encourage you, both those for and against a smoking ban, to let your voice be heard! If you are a smoker and want to continue to light up on campus please vote. If you are a non-smoker and want to breathe fresh air across campus, vote. We have the wonderful privilege to vote on a topic that we are all obviously very passionate about, so let’s not neglect that privilege by just huffing and puffing; let’s vote!

Jean Marie Snell, Nursing student

Someone has to be the devil’s advocate on the issue of the smoking ban. Smokers are not the only people opposed to the proposed ban. Many other people, myself included, consider it overreaching on the part of the SA. Encountering smoke clouds while walking outside to class is annoying, but it is absolutely not the public health issue as it has been painted as. Second hand smoke is dangerous and that’s why there is no smoking in buildings. Banning smoking seems to be a popular idea nowadays, but as young adults on this campus, we need to be aware of the hazards that come with trying to curb behavior and popular thought through litigation. If we’re going to start banning things that the majority of the student body has a negative opinion or no opinion about, I’ll be the first to sign the petition on Uggs and the like. And since we’ve decided to make rules for “their own good” the pop machines and Java City should close down. Studies show sugar and caffeine can be bad for you. Personal decisions and personal responsibility are key in a society like ours and even more so on a college campus. Smokers have a responsibility to be considerate of others and keep away from doors and open windows as well as dispose of their trash properly.

God Bless America.

Murphy Mack

Sophomore, Pre-Pharmacy

As of August I am now a recent graduate of SDSU. It’s amazing how true the words “You Can Go Anywhere From Here” are. I always laughed at the motto when I first heard it but I found it to be true. After graduating from SDSU, I am now attending Harvard University. This is greatly due to my education received by the Mathematics and Statistics department.

However what I did not know is that where I would be going is into even more debt and ruined credit after paying the pathetic student insurance plan. When I needed the plan the most and had to go into the hospital it refused to cover me due to my conditions being pre-existing. It seems to me that this plan benefits SDSU and Avera more than it benefits the students. I worked a couple different jobs while at SDSU among them driving the Safe Ride. I managed to pay for my tuition and my insurance without having to take out loans but I now must face a greater decision– find an attorney to defend myself against lawsuits from Avera due to over $25,000 in medical debt or face bankruptcy. Sadly that debt was acquired while “insured” as a student. I am not sure if the college is aware of how its choices in medical insurance affects each of the students there but rather than enjoying my life here in Boston I am working at filling out legal forms and trying to find an attorney. I urge students to look at the insurance offered. It may not cover you in a life or death situation and you may leave SDSU with a greater amount of debt, ruined credit or even lawsuits if you are unable to pay your medical bills. I love South Dakota and SDSU. I truly have only desired to move back and work for SDSU Mathematics and Statistics Department and the surrounding medical community when I am done at Harvard. I love that department and hold myself eternally grateful to them. However, to the rest of SDSU I border on bitterness and wanting to say thanks for the so called insurance and thanks to Avera for the lawsuits. I wonder if insurance is truly what they find best and most affordable for students or if it helps to cement deals in terms of getting funding for new buildings and programs?

Adam Sullivan

For many student veterans the transition from the military to college life can be challenging. One of the major challenges faced by veterans who have been recently discharged from the service is concerning benefits that are provided by the federal, state, and local governments. The Department of Defense provides the Transition Assistance Program (TAP), a week long class for active duty military who are one year or less from discharge. Subjects in TAP include résumé building, job searching, interviewing, and federal benefits. About 80 percent of TAP focuses on establishing a career after discharge from the military, the remaining 20 percent covers federal benefits and miscellaneous subjects.

To help the student veteran population at SDSU, the SDSU Veterans Club is hosting Mike Holzhauser, the Brookings County Veterans Service Officer and two Operations Iraqi Freedom and Enduring Freedom Case Managers from the VA Hospital in Sioux Falls. They will be in Room 260, the State Room, of the Student Union from 8-11 a.m. Jan.19. Both Mike Holzhauser and the case managers will answer any questions you may have about federal, state, or local benefits and resources available to veterans.

Derek Douglas

President, SDSU Veterans Club

I am writing this in response to Kyle Kranz’s opinion column entitled, “Healthy eating leads to a healthy person, “you truly are what you eat’.” I would like to tell you a little about my background before dwelling into Mr. Kranz’s column. My name is Jace Hollenbeck and I am senior animal science student here at SDSU with an emphasis in meat science. I have always respected vegetarians for the decision they make as it has been scientifically proven that a human can survive on a non-meat based diet with the correct supplementations to substitute the complete protein, minerals and vitamins that the non-meat diet is lacking (Fimreite, and Staack 1-2). I have always strived to back up my opinions and beliefs with scientific data and peer reviewed journal articles. I responded to Mr. Kranz with a few data backed clarifications and questions. Here is what I wrote to him:

Mr. Kranz, for a student that feels the need to express your opinion in a newspaper, you sure don’t write with any facts or terminology. I am assuming that you have seen the HBO documentary Life on a Factory Farm, and that you base your opinions towards livestock husbandry in this country on that documentary. You see ONE farm that mistreats its livestock and assume that all the farms in this country raise their livestock that way. Sounds a little misinformed to me. Also, what is a “belly ripper?” I am an animal science/meat science student here at SDSU and I have never heard of a piece of equipment referred to as a “belly ripper.” If you could tell me and the rest of the readers what exactly a “belly ripper” is that would be great. Furthermore, do you have a peer-reviewed article or some sort of scientific data that shows that castration of male piglets “rips out the intestines”? I don’t know if you know this but the testicles of the pig are positioned on the rear of the animal. They are suspended in the body via the cremaster muscle. The cremaster muscle originates from the oblique muscle in the abdominal cavity. The intestines lie underneath the oblique and abdominal muscles. The intestines are freely suspended in the body, that is they are not in any way attached the oblique muscles, the cremaster muscle or the testicles (McCracken, Kainer, and Spurgeon). So you see it would be virtually impossible to remove the intestines via castration. In addition, the article states that you are a nutrition student. As a student who studies what the body needs and how it utilizes it I would assume that you know that red meat/poultry/fish are the only sources of heme-iron, the only iron that is available for the human body to use. Nonheme-iron from plants is not readily able to utilized by the body, unless the body as a supply of heme-iron (the iron from meat) to make use of it (Aberle, Forrest, Gerrard, and Mills 247-59). Finally, you allude to the bible in your opinion. Well maybe you missed this verse so I will fill you in, “He whose faith is weak, eats only vegetables.” [Romans 14:2]. In my opinion you seem to be a student who has been mislead by advocates of what you speak. Many people who are proponents of the livestock industry have based their claims on no scientific data. I would encourage you to maybe visit the Animal Science Complex on the westside of campus and speak with an animal science professor on your thoughts. They will be able to provide you with the scientific data that you are lacking to form a well-educated opinion.

Unfortunately Mr. Kranz declined to answer my questions and requests to disclose his data. I hope the university community can see past his outrageous and scientifically irrelevant claims and form their own opinion on the subject by doing the research necessary to divulge into this subject. For the most part, the response from the Ag/Bio Community was largely professional and courteous; however, I think we need to remember that Mr. Kranz’s comments were in no way endorsed by the staff at The Collegian, they were simply the opinions of Mr. Kranz, placed in the Opinion section of The Collegian. In order to combat groups and individuals that shed negative, untruthful ideas about our industry we need to remain courteous and professional. Thank you.

In the article, Healthy eating leads to a healthy person, “you truly are what you eat’, I believe that there are many false statements that are misleading. Everyone is entitled to their own opinion and beliefs, but when stating your beliefs, I believe false comments are not appropriate. It is unfair to state comments that are not backed by research or information that can truly support what is being said. When it comes to controversial topics, any good writer would research what they are writing about, especially when they are passionate about it. There should be research done on what is being stated in The Collegian, it is a college newspaper and with technology always at our fingertips, there is no excuse for meager articles to be published that are poorly written with bogus information. I grew up on a cow-calf operation and have nothing against people choosing to be vegeterians, along as they understand the true facts about agriculture and obviously this is a case where The Collegian let false statements about agricultural practices “fill a slot” in the newspaper.

Michaela Braesch

Dear Editor:

I was appalled by the opinion section, “Healthy eating leads to a healthy person, “you truly are what you eat’”. Having an opinion is fine, but misrepresenting facts and presenting incorrect information is unacceptable. People not directly involved in agriculture may not be aware of all the benefits/uses of animal products and by-products. Due to this fact, I would like to correct some of the erroneous information presented.

* Vegans use animal derived products everyday called plastic

* Fertilizer comes from animals

* State and federal animal cruelty laws protect animals (including livestock)

* There is no such thing as a belly ripper

* Animals are NOT alive when processing takes place

* Farms provide animals with climate control, decreased predation conditions, balanced forage delivery, disease prevention, routine healthcare, & treatments for infections that could kill them in the wild

* Cows will produce more milk when they are comfortable and happy

* Pregnancy is not forced: wild/domestic animals get pregnant every year, even multiple times per year, year after year on their own initiative

* Assisting difficult birthing is routine

* Weaning is a natural part of life

* There is no such thing as uninterrupted milk production. After a certain period of time the cow will stop producing milk. She will need to become pregnant and calve again to initiate additional lactation.

Words have meaning, and as such you should choose your words carefully. Authors need to do proper research for writing and supporting with facts, even when writing opinion pieces.

Sincerely,

Lyssa Seefeldt

SDSU Graduate Student, Animal Range Sciences