Cuesta and Title IX
You recently wrote an article that an attorney with the U.S. Department of Education’s Office of Civil Rights would be in San Luis Obispo to investigate the Title IX complaint filed against Cuesta College for eliminating the women’s tennis team (“Federal agency to probe Cuesta,” April 20).
The San Luis Obispo chapter of the National Organization for Women and the San Luis Obispo branch of the American Association of University Women are holding a public forum on the status of women’s sports at Cuesta College on May 6 at 6 p.m. at the Ludwig Center. We urge all members of the public concerned about the future of women’s sports to attend.
Linda Joplin, an expert on Title IX and its implications for college sports, and Diane Milutinivich, Athletic Director Emerita at Fresno State University, will discuss how what is happening at Cuesta College conflicts with the federal gender equity law, Title IX.
Passed by Congress in 1972, Title IX legislation is designed to increase opportunities for women to participate in college-level sports by requiring all colleges that receive any federal money to meet criteria to assure women students access to sports.
For more information, call Angie King at 544-4331 or Carol Dover at 594-1751.
San Luis Obispo
Rally this weekend
If you have had enough “change” and your “hope” chest is just about empty, then come join our We The People Freedom Rally in Arroyo Grande on Saturday from 11 a.m. to noon at Grand Avenue and Oak Park Road.
If we are silent with our concerns, we have given concurrence to our leaders’ agenda.
The court’s job
An article recently said that President Barack Obama seeks a nominee for the Supreme Court who will understand “how court opinions affect people in real life” (“Obama has a road map for next justice’s confirmation,” April 18).
That is the job of Congress, not the court. The Supreme Court is to judge whether a law is in conformance with the Constitution, not whether it affects people one way or another.
That would truly be legislating from the bench and subvert the Constitution, not uphold it.
Ask anyone who participated in athletics what they miss most when they can no longer “play the game” and they will all tell you the same thing. They miss the competition, the drive and the intensity to do their best. It’s not about winning for them; it’s about getting the most out of what they had to give.
CBS announcer Bob Costas got it wrong when he approached both Lee Westwood and Tiger Woods in such a consoling way after they finished this year’s tournament. They both had tremendous accomplishments in finishing second and fourth. My God, someone had to win. How about congratulating them for their accomplishment and the opportunity they had to compete against the best?
Woods could also learn to respect his peers more. After not playing for almost six months and going through personal issues that most of us cannot fathom, he tells Costas how terrible he played when he finished fourth in the most prestigious tournament in the world. How about a little humility, Tiger?
Finally, the winner of the tournament offered the game of golf, and athletes in general, a lesson on what real winners in sports, and life, are all about.
Have to pay for it
Last week, tea partiers got together to protest taxes, big government, etc. Here is hoping that those protesters who are 65 and older will tear up their big government Medicare cards.
Also, I didn’t see any signs being held up by citizens of Atascadero calling for refusal of the Federal Emergency Management Agency tax dollars to retrofit their city hall. I guess the tea partiers like seeing the United States fall further behind other industrial nations in education and science.
Here is a thought for the lily-white tea partiers who want their country back: The president was born here, he is not a socialist nor is he a Muslim, and if you want the United States to be able to compete in this new century, we are going to have to pay for it. Yes, that means taxes for education and new forms of energy.
Politics vs. policy
In government, good policy should always trump good politics.
Unfortunately, when it comes to AB 32, the Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006, partisan politics has trounced policy.
These questionable regulations threaten the very survival of many California businesses and could force families to pay thousands of dollars more each year in higher food and energy costs.
AB 32 has nothing to do with clean air and pollution. The goal of AB 32 is to lower carbon dioxide emissions. Carbon dioxide is a gas that occurs naturally in the atmosphere and is exhaled by humans and animals. Carbon dioxide is not toxic, but rather is essential to life on Earth.
California’s go-it-alone approach is undermining our economic competitiveness.
AB 32 will cost every resident and business in this state. A study by CSU Sacramento said the “global warming tax” will raise the cost of living by almost $4,000 per household each year by 2020.
California residents and business owners can ill afford to see their electric and gas bills increase. The AB 32 global warming tax won’t save the earth, but will have a catastrophic effect on California’s economy.
Support the California Jobs Initiative, a measure proposed for the November ballot. It would freeze the provisions of AB 32 until California’s unemployment rate drops to 5.5 percent or below.