LETTERS: EQUAL BENEFITS FOR HIGHER EDUCATION

To the editor:

One of the greatest rewards of the life of any university president is realized on commencement day. This year, Loyola University Chicago awarded more than 1,000 undergraduate and 875 advanced-degree diplomas. I always receive tremendous personal and professional renewal from the proud faces of the graduates, their parents and their extended families. At the same time, I am keenly aware of the sacrifices students and their families make to reach this day.

For most young people and their families contemplating college today, the dilemma is one of access vs. choice. At the first Midwestern Higher Education Policy Summit held recently, university representatives and legislators from 18 states agreed that financial aid from state and federal sources is a key factor in determining whether and where students will obtain a college education. Preserving and extending this aid is one of our greatest public-policy changes.

At the core of the issue is the widening gap between the funds available to finance higher education and the cost of providing it. Ironically, current policies for financing higher education may be squeezing out the neediest students while subsidizing those who need it the least.

The National Association of Independent Colleges and Universities reports that taxpayers annually spend $12 billion to partially subsidize tuition at state institutions for students whose families earn $75,000 or more a year. The subsidies are in the form of block grants paid directly to the institution based on head count. If states were to assume responsibility for educating students now attending independent colleges or universities, the burden on taxpayers would exceed $13 billion.

Private institutions, on the other hand, enroll about the same proportion of students from those families with an annual income of less than $30,000 a year as those whose income exceeds $75,000, according to the association. In 1996-97, independent colleges and universities provided $6 billion in undergraduate assistance from their own resources, compared to $1.8 billion 10 years ago.

The huge state subsidies to public institutions, originally intended to provide access for all citizens, are based on enrollment and not on student need. In effect, large state universities received substantial taxpayer dollars for their operating and capital budgets, with wealthy and upper-middle-income families subsidized to the same extent as students from lower-income families. On the other hand, private institutions like Loyola increasingly accept and finance the education of children from low- and middle-income families who cannot pay for tuition while generally holding those who can afford it more financially accountable.

Financially eligible Illinois students benefit from the state's need-based Monetary Award Program, which provides up to $4,120 per student to help pay for tuition and mandatory fees. They also receive support from the federal Pell grants, which offer student awards of up to $3,000. However, the maximum amount awarded from the two grants amounts to less than half of tuition and fees at most private colleges and universities.

The result is that, for an increasing number of families who need subsidies, choices in higher education may be limited because private colleges and universities don't have the resources to match the subsidies provided state institutions. The challenge before us is to ensure continued access and affordability for the next generation of students.

We can begin by reforming the current system so that financial benefits are distributed fairly among the private and public institutions based on student need. This financial system also needs to respect the student's choice of institution and allow the freedom to pursue educational goals. Today's families should not have to decide whether a child will attend college or face overwhelming financial barriers in their option or where their children will receive an education.

It's time we give more scrutiny to the imbalance in the allocation of state benefits for higher education. We should begin by graduating to a system that invests in people, no institutions.

JOHN J. PIDERIT, S.J., President

Loyola University Chicago

Chicago

To the editor:

"A six-letter word for blue." Just the kind of world the puzzle worker lives in, but don't ask why he works a puzzle every day, for he may ask how you spend your time. The wag who first said "You can always find fun in the dictionary" might have included word puzzles. Of the 40,000 words or so which we know, any one might appear in a puzzle, and every word will tell a story.

The Post-Dispatch puzzle called for the word for blue. Cobalt was the answer. But how did cobalt, and element which is superhard, come to mean blue? A German etymology dictionary tells the story. When silver miners found blue streaks in the ore in the Hartz mountains 500 or more years ago, they believed that the Kobolt had been at work. You may know that the Kobolt is a goblin given to mischief. Come to the mine in the morning, and blue streaks have appeared. Blame the Kobolt. Pure cobalt is not blue, but if mixed with impurities it might be. And you go deeper into the mine than you have ever been. And you check the canary, and it has died. Then you suspect the fun-loving Kobolt.

Modern cobalt is so hard that magnets made from it cannot be machined but must be cast in the desired shape.

My madness about puzzles has helped to make me a local authority on cobalt.

But I am puzzled to note that although I have long been a regular morning disciple of word puzzles, I don't get better at it, and every day there are puzzles within the puzzle. But then life is sort of like that, and I wonder why, after having lived so long, I am not better at it.

PETER HILTY

Cape Girardeau

To the editor:

I recently purchased a new pickup truck by ordering from the factory through a dealer. This way I was able to get the desired extras that I wanted without having to take anything that I didn't want -- all except air bags. This truck was equipped with two air bags which I did not want but which were forced on me by an unconstitutional act by an unconstitutional government agency which is playing the part of God.

The passenger-side air bag can be turned off by a switch on the dash, but the driver-side air bag cannot be turned off. Does it make any sense that the passenger has more rights than the driver? It definitely does not, but it makes the same amount of sense that any other socialist act does.

Now we get to the worse part. In the cab of this truck were three tags which stated: Warning -- Children can be killed or injured by passenger air bag. The back seat is the safest place for children 12 and under. Where is the back seat in a conventional pickup? This more socialist stupidity. It only confirms what most people already know: Socialism simply doesn't work. It never has and never will.

Our government, especially the president, is always claiming that every act of government is aimed at protecting or improving the lot of our children. The facts give lie to these claims. Air bags kill children, yet we are forced to buy them. Government agents have murdered children in Waco and Ruby Ridge, but instead of being sent to the gas chamber like other citizens, they were promoted with a raise in pay. Our $5 trillion debt is left for our children to pay off or suffer the consequences of a takeover by foreign bond holders. So, does anyone with a trace of a brain really believe that our representatives in government really care anything for our children?

Congress can correct all these things, but it is more interested in pleasing the insurance companies and big banks and in their own power than they are in the well-being of our children. Remember the wise saying: Actions speak louder than words.

There are a few in Congress who should be retained, but the majority must go if we ever hope to return our country to greatness and freedom for all, as it used to be.

RAY UMBDENSTOCK

Cape Girardeau

To the editor:

This past week has been quite an experience in life for me and my old car, Old Red. Last week, Old Red was sitting at a four-way stop being mannerly and waiting his turn. All of a sudden a huge, yellow fellow named John Deere came up behind him and hit him with a 6-foot-in-diameter concrete collar. Needless to say, it knocked the glass out his back window and inserted a nasty dent in his trunk.

Just four days later, I was in the hospital having about the same thing happen to me. I had colonoscopy. A single polyp was previously discovered, and the objective was to remove it. In doing so, seven polyps were discovered and removed. Thus, Old Red and I both experienced quite a trauma. Now we are waiting for a verdict. Will we be totaled and considered a complete loss, or will we be considered for future opportunities to contribute to this world we are in.

We have discovered, Old Red and I, that waiting for a verdict is an extremely frightening thing one has to sometimes do. There is one verdict, however, for human beings that can be assured before the day of judgment. God says in his word he will accept and acquit us -- declare us not guilty -- if we trust Jesus Christ to take away our sins. Yes, all have sinned and fall short of God's glory. But because of his unlimited grace, we can find forgiveness through Jesus Christ, who freely takes away our sin.

RON FARROW

Cape Girardeau