Bureaucracy big or small jumps on public polls no matter the cost

By By [email protected]

By [email protected]

I am writing in response to Tyler Peterson’s Article “All about money: funds lacking for recycling” which appeared in the Wednesday April 21 edition. “We could make recycling pay. We just have to make it a priority,” Micah Jeppsen said.This statement alone is telling of our society and government. Jeppsen said this after he was told by experts who had looked over a feasibility study for implementing a recycling program here at the U that such a program would be too expensive to implement. I want to know what class do politicians take that gives them this particular insight, that while we are spending $30,000 dollars a year to recycle 10% of our waste that miraculously by spending hundreds of thousands of dollars to increase this program to 90% we will be making money off of it and not have to worry about costs down the road.Currently glass, steel, and aluminum are a few of the products that can be recycled for a profit. The rest of the recycling programs that are spread across the country are subsidized by taxes. Without this money these programs would go belly-up. If Jeppsen thinks that by implementing a farther reaching recycling program on campus then it will pay for itself, he is wrong! There will either have to be an increase in funding from legislature, which I am sure is just around the corner after all we have seen so many over the last 3 years, or an increase in tuition.This seems to be the problem with government, be it student, state, or federal. If a poll says that the people feel there is a problem then government is more then willing to throw money at it now to get the popularity and let others worry about the money drain later. Our government sits on a multi-trillion dollar deficit because of this mentality. The money could be used for a much better end, setting up long range fixes rather then these short sighted quickies. Why not create a research facility that could study ways to create a low cost recycling program for the more expensive material, i.e. paper and plastics? This would benefit the U in multiple ways. By creating a facility like this, all that trash which Jeppsen is worried about would be needed for the project. It would also increase educational opportunities for students at the U, with an increase in undergraduate and graduate level research projects. Finally, if successful it would create a patentable process which the U could use as well and sell to others increasing revenue for the school. Once government comes to understand that it is better to attempt to solve a problem for the long run rather then providing quick fix for popular support we will be able to start seeing a lowering of governmental overspending.

Nathan Morrill Senior, Mechanical Engineering