The Washington Post and The Guardian were awarded the Pulitzer Prize for public service on Monday for their work reporting the National Security Agency spying scandal that rocked the country. Based on documents leaked by whistleblower Edward Snowden, both papers revealed the widespread effort undertaking by the NSA and US government to spy on American citizens in an attempt to prevent future 9/11-esque threats.
The award echoes the one given to The New York Times in 1971 for its publication of the Pentagon Papers leaked by Daniel Ellsberg that revealed the secret history of the Vietnam War and the false information fed to the public by the government.
To The Editor:
A previous edition of this paper included a letter to the editor from senator on the Student Government. In this letter, the senator was upset with the “blatant waste” that has been occurring within our Student Government. This senator has failed to mention several key details.
Our Student Government Association is not in the business to “blatantly waste” student activity fees. Throughout this semester each committee, including the Finance Committee, has been hard at work helping improve our wonderful school. No senator joins SGA for personal gain or benefit. We all work hard to resolve issues, and make better our school.
To Whom It May Concern:
As a Central Connecticut State University student, it was an honor to welcome the President of the United States to our campus community. CCSU is at the center of our state and the center of the lives of its students. Our campus is filled with diverse individuals who strive to go above and beyond to achieve success.
CCSU may be small, but the students here are connected by strong social and academic bonds. Unfortunately, actions of many students who express passion and devotion to CCSU were unnoticed when President Obama came to speak on March 5, 2014.
As a student senator, I recognize that all 105 clubs and organizations that rely on us for funding are all financially stressed. Over the past few years, our student government has continuously demanded that student organizations find more ways to do things with less funding and fewer resources. This year, every club had received funding cuts across the board. I remember on my first year on the senate we had funded club base budgets at $408,000 for the 2012-2013 academic year. However, this year we have only spent $355,000 on clubs based budgets. Our SGA has spent $55,000 less on clubs this year than we spent in the previous year.
By: SGA Senator Bobby Berriault
January 26, 2014
Last week, I had presented my plan to the Student Government to change the current Student Activity Fee rate that each student pays. Currently, every full time student pays $70 dollars per semester in Student Activity fees. Part time students currently do not pay student activity fees.
My proposal calls for reducing student activity fees for full time students by $4, and having matriculated part time students pay $25 per semester. I strongly feel that, since every student (part time and full time) benefits from the many events and activities held on our campus each year–such as our spring concert–and considering the fact that every student has an equal opportunity in becoming more involved by joining a club or organization, every student should contribute their fair share towards funding these events and campus organizations.
To the Editor,
The staff from The Recorder attended a different Open Forum than members of the Student Government and our student body attended. In a miscast and perhaps overly dramatic description of the event, the article titled “Open Forum Raises Difficult Questions” discusses a forum tension that simply didn’t occur.
Students were encouraged to attend the event to air concerns to both these groups: The Student Government and Faculty Panel. Representatives from the Academic Affairs Committee took rather copious notes that accurately recorded a variety of student concerns. Questions from students were answered directly by those who were most in the know. The article in last week’s paper alluded to consistent tension between the students and faculty panel where instead there was a mature dialogue. These misleading article phrases do not accurately depict this event: “Tension between the panel and the crowd rose…” and “The panel was silent after such an introduction to the forum.” Instead of silence and tension as the article describes, the faculty took reasonable amounts of time to respond to each concern. There was a free and forthright exchange of ideas among attendees.