Letters

Attack on USAC amendment unjust The criticism
against the new system of allocating USAC funds by the Editorial
Board (“Flawed
law makes allocation of funds impossible,” Viewpoint,
Jan. 25) is completely unwarranted. The previous method of
allocations were simply corrupt. Before, only a few groups were
eligible for any real sum of money. These same groups were the ones
that got their people elected to USAC. It was a political machine
that existed under the previous rules. Now, all groups will have a
chance to start and expand programs to enrich student life at UCLA.
Students will have a chance to enjoy many diverse programs, not
just those of a small number of groups whose interests are in
getting themselves reelected to USAC. It is ironic that those who
most loudly preach “diversity” want to limit the
diversity of groups receiving funding to a small number of
same-minded groups who represent the status quo.

Daniel B. Rego Graduate, Class of 2000

Ashcroft not fit for office It’s amazing
how well Chey Tor contradicts himself in his article
“Rage
over cabinet nominee useless“ (Viewpoint, Jan. 26) about
John Ashcroft. He states that Ashcroft does not have to
“agree” with laws in order to enforce them. Tor seems
quite satisfied with Ashcroft’s promise that he would be a
“fair and impartial U.S. attorney general.” My, my, my,
how naive can we be? In the article, Tor cites Ashcroft’s
record in “resisting federal efforts to desegregate public
schools,” efforts that significantly improved black
graduation rates in other states. So let’s see, as attorney
general of Missouri, Ashcroft disagreed with desegregation laws,
and guess what? He didn’t enforce them! Amazingly Tor
believes that Ashcroft will “indiscriminately” enforce
laws even though he discriminately did not enforce laws that helped
disadvantaged minorities. Furthermore, not only did he not enforce
them, but he resisted the findings of the U.S. Supreme Court. This
amounts to a direct violation of Article Six of the U.S.
Constitution which states, “This Constitution, and the laws
of the United States … shall be the supreme law of the land …
and every state shall be bound thereby.” In doing so,
Ashcroft not only violated this principle of federal supremacy, but
as an agent of the executive branch of government, he breached the
separation of powers, the quintessential spirit of the
Constitution, by ignoring a specific order of the supreme judicial
body. I would think actions speak louder than words. Tor needs to
wake up and realize that politicians lie as easily as they tell the
truth. If Ashcroft really is “a man of honor and
integrity,” as alluded to in Tor’s article, then
perhaps the people who know him best ““ the voters in his home
state ““ might have chosen to elect him rather than the dead
man they chose for their senator. The sad outcome in all of this is
not that John Ashcroft will become the next attorney general of the
United States, but that the American public has come to expect far
too little of its political leaders from all sides of the political
spectrum. And while Ashcroft is no doubt an illegitimate
politician, he is probably not too much worse than our current
Attorney General Janet Reno, during whose reign oversaw the murder
of children in Waco and put down full support for the U.S. drug war
““ in and of itself a crime against the poor peoples of the
Third World. Ashcroft’s rise to the top is a direct result of
U.S. politics ““ politics of privilege.

Rahul Varshney Third-year Computer science and
engineering