January 23, 1997

Cable Wars: Not showing on your local cable operator
My Turn
Matt Belejeski
Columnist

Okay, folks, after much searching and phone calling, I finally have the skinny (deal, info, inside track, etc.) on the cable situation.

As most of you already know from a flyer under your doors, Booth Communications changed their channel line-up and now offers 67 channels. I didn't know there were that many channels (maybe the Brazilian Sumo Wrestling Channel is included) out there.

Because of ASU's current cable receiving facilities, we can only receive channels 2-39. Some dorms may be able to receive a few more, due to their proximity to the houses across the street.

After talking with Dr. Alfred Rapp, the Associate Vice Chancellor for Finance, I was told that a rough estimate of the cost to receive all 67 channels was $200,000. Money has already been allocated and is waiting to be used. However, school engineers are working on the installation process as we speak.

In simplified terms (the only kind I know how to give), the fiber optics for the dorms to receive all 67 channels are already in the ground. What we need now is a stronger main receiver to receive the signal from Booth Communications. From that main receiver, there needs to be a unit in each residence hall to receive that signal and splice it to individual rooms.

Whew! That's quite a mouthful. There are two things that bug me about this whole situation.

The first fact that rubs me the wrong way is that we pay around $810 a semester for room and board. Included in that cost is cable service. Well, it seems to me that we're paying for something we are currently not receiving.

To get a reply to this all too important question, I talked to Robert Feid, the Associate Vice Chancellor of Student Development. He explained that ASU signed a contract with Booth Communications that gave ASU the power to receive the cable signal for a significantly less amount of money than normal cable subscribers pay. When ASU first signed this contract, the option of having the school purchase a satellite dish was investigated. Finding that the contract with Booth Communications would be more economical, ASU signed the contract.

Question number two revolves around the letter that Housing sent to us. The letter reads, and I quote, "We were notified on December 4, 1996, that Booth Communications was going to change the channel line-up effective Monday, January 6, 1997."

Okay, if Housing knew about the channel changes on the 4th, why was no attempt made to contact students, all of which were here (or supposed to be here) on the 5th and 6th of January? If a response that quick would be deemed for the likes of Super-Notification Man, why not tell us during exam week, when the majority of the student body was here? Personally, I (like many residents in East Hall) would like to know if the channel that airs Jerry Springer is no longer available.

I tried to get in contact with Brad Reid, the Director of Housing, four times, but he was either in a meeting or out of the office.

Now of course, ASU has not been lax in trying to stem the flood of the cable problem. Equipment is on order for receivers which will allow us to receive 6 more channels, which are:

CNBC
Discovery Channel
A&E
TLC
C-Span
History Channel

God knows I watch every one of those channels religiously. But the reason given by Robert Feid for choosing these channels was, "that they revolved around academics."

Okay, okay. I guess I can understand that. My question is:

why were we not told earlier?

[back]

The Emperor Strikes Back
Viewpoint
Andrew Harley
Columnist

Voters in California and Arizona sent a firm message to state officials opposed to propositions 215 and 200, which called for cannabis to be allowed for medicinal use. Leave doctors and patients out of the war on drugs. The propositions were successful and marijuana's medicinal properties were officially approved by the majority of voters in the two states.

On December 26, 1996, I was fortunate enough to talk with Jack Herer (the man whose research for his enlightening book, "The Emperor Wears No Clothes," began the modern hemp movement), about federal government attempts in California to convince doctors that if they prescribed cannabis they would be prosecuted under federal laws against marijuana.

Four days later, drug czar Barry McCaffrey and Attorney General Janet Reno held a special press conference to publicize their ideas on the issue. Their ideas were to arrest doctors who prescribed marijuana, arrest caregivers who might grow marijuana for terminally ill friends who are unable to, and finally, arrest those patients who use marijuana as medicine. In short they have chosen to, as Herer put it, "outlaw the natural."

McCaffrey and Reno based this attack against democracy on the implication that the bills were designed to give children access to more marijuana. Children in this country, who have never had a voice in politics, have been used as scapegoat scare tactics against the public's knowledge and freedom ever since the beginning of marijuana prohibition. (Rent the movie "Reefer Madness." It's a prime example of what the public was taught prior to federal laws against the drug being passed.)

How could patients smoking marijuana possibly affect the percentage of young smokers more than prohibition does? In 1995, before the two propositions were even known outside of their respective states, the number of marijuana arrests in the U.S. broke the world record for any country, of all time, with a stellar 588,963 arrests, 86 percent of which were simply for possession! Nationwide, however, marijuana use among eighth graders is sky-rocketing, proof enough that stringent marijuana policies do not effectively curb adolescent use.

They also told Americans that voters in the states involved with the two propositions (in California especially, where the vote was close), were lied to and "tricked" about marijuana's medicinal benefits by "drug addicts" with enough money to pay for media time. That's an insult to anyone who voted. Yes, donations came from marijuana smokers, who are by no means "drug addicts," and who funded the proposition for compassionate use reasons. Geneficiaries also included non-smokers, who funded it for the same reasons as the smokers. No one from the pharmaceutical industry funded it, you can bet on that. Medical marijuana means billions of dollars up in smoke for them. They currently donate millions of dollars to anti-marijuana groups such as the Partnership For a Drug Free America.

The question is, however, how does our federal government justify refusing the requests of patients who can benefit from natural medicine, by trying to overrule medical marijuana laws, while ignoring Ohio's new marijuana initiative, which, in reality comes closer to decriminalization? While the feds have raised hell over the public's support of smoking cannabis to alleviate numerous ailments, they have ignored the new law in Ohio which makes cultivation of under 99 grams of cannabis a misdemeanor. Anything more than 99 grams and less than 200 grams is a fourth degree misdemeanor. Previously, Ohio marijuana smokers would have faced a 6-10 year prison sentence for growing that much cannabis. Is it ironic that state laws decriminalizing casual use and growth of marijuana are virtually ignored and state laws stressing the medical use of the same flower are worthy of federal intervention? Or is our government protecting the financial interests of a pharmaceutical industry which has held a monopoly on medicine since cannabis prohibition laws took effect?

The U.S. Federal government has been engaged in a unique "war" since 1937, a war against it's own people and the extremely resourceful hemp plant. Our government was founded on the idea of individual liberation from one-sided tyrannical rulers. They made that clear when they told the world that human beings "are endowed by their creator with certain inalienable rights." I personally believe that elected officials should have to memorize the Declaration of Independence as a prerequisite to being sworn in, and after they take office they should carry a copy of the United States Constitution with them wherever they go. Maybe then they will realize it was written as a sort of insurance for the people, protection from these "central authority" types of legislative abominations against the personal freedoms that America was founded upon.

[back]

Our Opinion...

As a member of the Vice Chancellor's Leadership Cabinet, I would like to extend an invitation to the students, faculty and staff here at Appalachian.

As indicated in the article I wrote about the alleged sexual assault which was reported to have occurred on campus over the weekend, fellow members of the Cabinet and I will host An Appalachian Community Meeting next week, in the Student Union. Though the date has still not been confirmed, I think that this event is certainly not to be missed.

Statistics tell us that about one in every four women will be sexually assaulted in her lifetime. In many cases, sexual assaults happen while a woman is in college. Did you know that the most common time period that college women are sexually assaulted is during their very first semester?

Sexual assault is one of many safety issues that have come into the public's attention recently here at Appalachian. It is important that members of the university community work together to take steps to prohibit as many crimes as possible from happening in the environment we either live, study or work in.

An Appalachian Community Meeting was organized by members of the Leadership Cabinet to bring the administration and staff of the university together with students and faculty to provide a venue for constructive, pro-active discussion.

Here's what you can expect to see and hear during An Appalachian Community Meeting: the Chancellor and other administrators expressing their genuine concern for student welfare and safety, members of the Leadership Cabinet (who are students) taking action, and other special guests like Captain Larry Foster who works hard to provide as much security as possible on our campus.

A question and answer session will be held after a presentation of brief comments from the panel.

Please, if you have any spare time on the night that this event will be held, come and join us. Even if you just sit and listen, you will add to the number of people who are sincerely interested in working to effect positive changes.

It's time for the university community to come together and stop blaming individuals and organizations for the way that safety is handled at Appalachian. It is everyone's responsibility as a member of the community to attend this meeting.

Please keep a look out for a coming announcement of the time, date and specific meeting place for An Appalachian Community Meeting to appear in The Appalachian and around campus.

I look forward to seeing you at the meeting.

[back]

Letters to the Editor

One dog's lucky day

To the Editor,
Today I was at work in Trivette Hall and saw something very courageous along with everyone else in the office. I saw a dog step onto the ice on the duck pond. He slid on the ice and fell into the water. He tried effortless to get out of the water onto the ice. It was so sad to watch him reach but not get anywhere. People started to run toward the pond. A young man who was at the edge of the pond, stripped down to his t-shirt and shorts and jumped in the water to rescue the dog. I am a student worker inTrivette Hall. I was grateful for the young man who saved the dog and we, the staff, would like to thank and applaud the young man who saved the dog. This proves that good Samaritans still exist. And as my cousin says, "Every dog has his day." I am just glad that stranger (sic) cared enough to save the dog.

Stephanie Ido
email: SI14707

Bob's hate mail

I’m sorry Mr. Hutton that you are so jealous of Ms. Stanley’s hate mail. It must be terrible for you. But Joy’s article contained something that yours rarely do. Thought. Although I don’t agree with her, and I think that her article shows no proof of any research, she put a ton of thought behind every, and that is very evident. It must take a lot of energy to write an article slamming rap music. I don’t exactly dig on rap, really now - what’s the point in slamming it? If you don’t like it, do listen to it. Simple.

Your most recent article, sadly, shows about as much research as Stanley’s. The only exception is that her article was written with more maturity. (No sweeping suggestions of hallucinations of Bippo Monkey) The only reason people were outraged was because of the lack of research put into her article, some parts were just plain wrong. I find it also very saddening that you have formed stereotypes of people who smoke marijuana based on Cheech and Chong. (I bet Newt Gingrich’s mind is still "fried" from his experiences with marijuana in college..whatever) People who toke, do it for themselves, not to entertain those who strive to get hate mail and fell that they need to be trivial in the face of something that is extremely important in today’s society. I won’t indulge into all the uses for the marijuana plant, because we all learned that last semester. Sorry you new freshman/transfers, I don’t mean to exclude you.

I hope that this suffices your thirst for hate mail, but if you want to receive more responses, write something worth talking about. Just a thought.

Deanne Maule
ASU Box 13863

[back]

E-mail The Appalachian Online at theapp@conrad.appstate.edu