In a prime-time address from the White House’s Oval Office Tuesday, Aug. 31, President Barack Obama declared that Operation Iraqi Freedom is over, and we are now focusing on Afghanistan.

American troops are scheduled to pull out of Afghanistan in July 2011, though speculation and concern arise after recently withdrawing combat units from Iraq.

Kaytlin Pelton, junior biology major from Aberdeen, said the 11-month time frame allows for plenty of time for the removal of troops, though has doubts.

“It’s a sufficient amount of time, but I don’t think it’s going to happen,” Pelton said.

After nine years since the terrorist attacks of the World Trade Centers and the Pentagon, the U.S. Military has had more than 4,400 deaths and 30,000 injuries during Operation Iraqi Freedom alone.

In an Aug. 23 press conference General David Petraeus, the top U.S. and North Atlantic Trade Organization commander in Afghanistan, said the U.S. Military will be looking “for the exit and a light to turn out” before the 11-month time frame ends.

Although the situations in Iraq and Afghanistan are different, the gradual process and plan implemented to bring combat troops home from Iraq will be utilized in Afghanistan.

SDSU alumnus Isaac Randall, a member of South Dakota’s Air National Guard, said the issues and levels of complexity in Afghanistan are relevant as ever.

“Afghanistan sure is an interesting place … There is a real and obvious dilemma in Afghanistan because of the Taliban and certain minority groups that are in complete opposition to them,” Randall said.

Although he has more training to go through before able to deploy, the Dell Rapids native said the likelihood of increasing amounts of troops deployed to Afghanistan is a possibility. Military personnel generally are not hesitant to be deployed, Randall said.

“I’m not worried that I have to go (to Afghanistan),” Randall said. “I wouldn’t have signed up for the military if I was.”

As of Aug. 6, since the initial 5,000 troops were stationed in Afghanistan in 2003 of NATO’s International Security Assistance Force, the amount of troops has grown to more than 120,000, according to NATO’s website.

Pelton said she does not understand the need for the amount of troops in Afghanistan and Kuwait when she continually hears stories of soldiers having large amounts of “down time.”

Other SDSU students approve of actions taken by America’s leaders. Ben Van Moer, junior music education major of Tracy, Minn., said although he is not up-to-date with current situations in Afghanistan, the U.S. is making appropriate decisions.

“I think [the war] is slowing down a little bit … but I think getting out of Iraq was a huge step in the right direction of getting out of there,” Van Moer said.

SDSU political science professor Delmer Lonowski said the time frame of when U.S. troops will return home depends on when American taxpayers will tire of supplying funds. Lonowski also said the Taliban’s possibility of returning to power is an issue with regards of when and how troops leave Afghanistan.

“There’s a lot of potential for the Taliban to come back into power,” Lonowski said. “They might be able to beat the U.S. since they did beat the Soviets.”

Officials of NATO said an end is in sight and that American soldiers will be returning home from Afghanistan on schedule.

“Our aim, agreed to by the entire international community, is that by 2014 Afghans will be in the lead across the country,” said Secretary General of NATO Anders Fogh Rasmussen in a Sept. 11 issue of the Washington Post.

Though with more talk of scheduling troops to eventually come home, two South Dakota Army National Guard units have received word they will be deployed in support of Operation Enduring Freedom in Afghanistan next spring.

The 200th Engineer Company and the 451st Engineer Detachment firefighting team both will be deployed. Both units will perform security missions, along with bridging operations.

“I don’t understand a need for putting more troops over there. It’s ridiculous that they can’t come home,” Pelton said.

Last week was full of fun experiences for me. First, on Monday, Consulate General of Canada Martin Loken spoke on campus. Mr. Loken gave a lecture about the relationship that the United States has with Canada. His talk was full of information about the importance of trade between our two countries. Mr. Loken explained that the United States has never had a more important ally than Canada. It is true the United States and Canada share a unique relationship.

During the question and answer portion of the presentation, an audience member asked why Canadians know more about the United States than we know about them. The answer of course is simple: we’re bigger. Mr. Loken pointed out that the population of the United States is ten times the size of Canada, and when there is a behemoth living next door you’re bound to pay attention. The relationship between our two countries got me thinking of another famous relationship: the relationship between Marsha and Jan Brady. Like people paid more attention to Marsha, people pay more attention to the United States than they do Canada. But, Canada is far nicer to us than Jan was ever to Marsha. For instance, when a football was lobbed at our face in December of 1941, did Canada relish in the fact that the United States was never going to be a teen model? No. Canada extended a helping hand in restoring peace in the world. In that respect Canada is more like cousin Oliver, helping us solve our problems, and for that I am thankful.

Friday was Constitution Day. As the name suggests, Constitution Day is a day to celebrate one of humanities greatest documents: the United States Constitution. In honor of the Constitution, the Department of History and Political Science hosted a federally-mandated Constitution Day celebration. I’m sure you”re thinking “Oh, that’s nice.” Go ahead, re-read that sentence again, especially the part about the federally-mandated Constitution Day celebration. You read that correctly. Constitution Day comes with a federal mandate that any institution of higher learning that receives federal funding must set aside time on Constitution Day in order to discuss the Constitution. Now, I have nothing against discussing the Constitution, but it seems a little counter-intuitive to force institutions of higher learning, the bastions of free thought, into celebrating the Constitution.

I’m sure a lot of you don’t remember growing up celebrating Constitution Day. That’s because it wasn’t a holiday until 2004 when a Democrat senator slid the creation of the holiday and the federal mandated celebrations into the omnibus spending bill. I’m sure most of you are familiar with the now infamous University of Florida taser incident. You know, the one that made the quote “Don’t tase me bro!” world- famous. Well, did you know that incident happened at a federally mandated Constitution Day celebration? If federally mandating institutions of higher learning into celebrating and discussing the Constitution wasn’t bad enough, it was only made worse by silencing someone’s free speech at the point of a taser. I’m not a history scholar but it seems to me that this is the very thing we fought for during the Revolutionary War.

I do have to give kudos to the political science department and history department for putting together a stellar discussion that ended up being standing room only. And the amazing thing was that this was at 3:30 p.m. on a Friday afternoon.

One of my professors recently said in class that the university experience is more than just attending classes (I thought, I know it’s also about O’Hare’s, Cubby’s, Skinners, Ray’s Corner and Jim’s Tap). He said that involves attending events and speakers to broaden your horizon. I couldn’t agree more. I didn’t write this column just to tell you what I did last week. It’s to let you all know that some really cool things happen on campus every week (I mean, come on, it’s not every week that a top diplomat from Canada visits Brookings). And, even if extra credit isn’t offered, it’s important to take advantage of these opportunities.

Tony Reiss is a non-traditional student majoring in economics. Contact Tony at anthony.reiss@jacks.sdstate.edu.

Buying textbooks is never easy on students’ wallets, but Congress is working to make the cost more bearable.

In July 2010 a Federal law was put in place that requires textbook publishers to have a variety of information available so faculty members can make the best decisions when selecting course materials.

The summary of the Higher Education Opportunity Act by Vincent Sampson said, “The HEOA supports academic freedom of faculty to select high-quality course materials for their students while imposing several new provisions to ensure that students have timely access to affordable course materials at postsecondary institutions receiving Federal financial assistance.”

Sampson is the deputy assistant secretary for policy, planning and innovation in the Office of Postsecondary Education.

Frank LaMonte, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, said high textbook prices for college students have been a growing concern.

“The whole thrust of the law is to put more information of the pricing of textbooks into the hands of consumers, which Congress is hoping will result in holding down prices,” LaMonte said.

The HEOA mandates that companies must disclose the information listed to the right/left.

One of these requirements is the price of course materials as separate units, not as a bundled package made up of various components.

“Professors are entitled to know if the materials are available in an unbundled way, and if so, at what cost,” LaMonte said. “Congress was concerned that publishers were making extra profits by putting a DVD in every textbook.”

Unneeded bundled materials results in students getting less for their money.

“Some bundled products may not be used by the faculty and therefore add cost without enhancing the learning experience,” said Sue Blodgett, plant science department head.

Another aspect that has the potential to better inform faculty members is the disclosure of “a description of substantial content revisions” made to newer textbook editions. This will help buyers to decide if a new edition is worth the cost.

“I think what we will see is that any publisher that was just slapping the words “new edition’ on the book will be exposed,” LaMonte said.

In the law’s summary Sampson also said publishers must include “whether the textbook is available in other formats, and if so, the price to the institution and to the general public.” This would include options such as selling only individual chapters, as well as completely online versions.

“The institution itself is supposed to be making more information available online for consumers so that students can be made aware of alternatives for buying new books,” LaMonte said.

While not all publishing companies were guilty of treating consumers unfairly, the HEOA provides a stricter regulation where this may be the case.

“(Before the law) it was a much more regulated marketplace where the publishers could just about name their price,” LaMonte said.

For multiple SDSU faculty members, finding the necessary information from textbook companies has not always provided any trouble.

“It’s never been a problem for me to source information,” said Volker Brozel, acting head for the biology and microbiology department. “I’ve never had a problem where they’ve been secretive. It’s not in [the companies'] interest.”

Kurt Cogswell, mathematics and statistics department head, said the policies of this law have already started to be followed.

“As a result of pressure from faculty, students and others, the overall textbook market price model was already changing prior to the passage of this law,” Cogswell said. “It will likely be hard to say how much the passage of this law accelerates or otherwise modifies that ongoing process.”

If faculty members or students do have problems receiving necessary information, they must know their rights that the HEOA provides and act on them.

LaMonte said, “The law is only as good as the diligence of the professors and the students.” If faculty members or students have questions about materials they are using and purchasing, the law guarantees them answers if they are proactive and ask.

“It’s going to take a year or two for the awareness that this information is available,” LaMonte said. “In order for professors to hold the textbook publishers accountable, they have to know their rights and take that affirmative step.

#1.1599534:3316403687.jpg:Textbooks:Textbooks: