Categories
News

Continued Closure of the Flats Explained

Early in the spring of 2012, Houghton College made the decision to close the flats for student housing. This was disappointing news to much of the student body for multiple reasons.
“The main reason for the uproar was because of the misconceptions surrounding the decision to close the flats” said Jim Vitale, junior.

College Flats. Courtesy of www.hagerengineering.com
College Flats. Courtesy of www.hagerengineering.com

The bulk of students’ arguments seem to revolve around financial issues and a lack of understanding thereof, especially given that the flats appear to have remained open and functional.
The decision to close the flats was sparked by a need to decrease spending across campus. Each department was asked to account for their spending and to make some cuts. In a campus-wide email sent out this last week, Dr. Robert Pool, who recently became VP for Student Life, said that, “We have also had to make some sacrifices.” He continued to say that “Necessary cuts were made with a wise eye toward optimizing learning and trimming excess.”

The decision to cut the flats boils down to occupancy management practices.
“We made the decision based on the information we had at the time” said Gabe Jacobsen, director of Residence Life.
During last spring—when the cuts were decided—there were roughly 90 rooms that were left empty in the resident halls.
“When we were making the decision to close the flats, we realized we could have done it the year before and still been able to house everybody; it just wasn’t on the radar” stated Jacobsen, “even if the incoming freshmen class surpassed 400,” a number larger than any of the current classes, “we would still be okay”

There are currently some possibilities being considered for ways in which the institution could change the structure of the flats to accommodate for future use. One suggestion proposed would be to change the requirements for living in the flats. Currently students must be in their second year at Houghton with a minimum of 60 credits and not be on disciplinary probation.

Nevertheless these changes exist only as possibilities for the future. According to Jacobsen, “at least as of this year the capacity of housing will outmatch the current projection for the incoming class.” However, the school will remain flexible. If the need for extra housing arises, the prospect of reopening the flats is not completely out of the question.

Currently the former student residence has been re-purposed for short-term housing for various groups and organizations that Houghton hosts such as youth groups and sports camps. Having the flats available for this purpose makes accommodating guests during these events more feasible for the Residence Life department. Previously the unused parts of the Gillette basement were utilized for this purpose.

Furthermore, being in such a remote location severely limits housing options for new faculty members, and so the flats have recently been utilized for long-term housing for transitioning faculty members.

“Having the flats available has made the transition to Houghton easier for several new faculty and administrators since I was essentially able to tell them ‘we have a place that you can rent for a while,’” said Dale Write, Executive Director of Human Resources and Administration.
Not only has closing the flats benefitted the institution by enabling Houghton to house faculty long term and providing room for groups and organizations to stay while on campus, but also, according to Mr. Wright, “The combination of additional revenue and expense reductions have surpassed our expectations.”

Categories
News

Annual Internship and Summer Employment Day

news_jobfairHoughton College’s Career Services will put on the annual internship and Summer EmploymentDay on Wednesday, February 6th from noon to 3:00 P.M. in the Campus Center Van Dyk Lounge. Thirty-five employers will be on campus for the purpose of recruiting Houghton students for summer jobs and internships.  Camps and businesses will be looking to hire students from all fields of study. A complete list of attendees is posted on the HC Career Services Facebook page, as well as in the Career Services office.

Categories
Opinions

Fear Mongering and Media Bias

www.salon.com
Fear Mongering

Over the course of the last couple years the discussion over gun control has been gaining momentum. Unless you lead a secluded life, you have at least heard the incessant hubbub surrounding the debate, if not outright participated.

When the Aurora and Sikh shootings happened over this past summer I followed the ensuing debate very closely. I gained a strong stance against guns. For the most part, the arguments of the predominantly liberal pro-gun control crowd resonated well with me. Guns are designed to kill, and though they are not responsible for high crime rates, easier access provides the opportunity to do more harm, and after all, who needs a 30 round magazines?

Then I heard some interesting statistics revealing that over the course of the last 20 years, crime rates have been dramatically decreasing in the United States.  According to crime stats provided by the FBI, America had a violent crime rate of 757.7 per 100,000 in 1992. Fast forward to 2012, and America’s violent crime rate dropped to 386.3 per 100,000. That is an almost 50 percent decrease. If this is true, why isn’t it better publicized? The media seems to want us to think that we will get shot every time we walk out our front door.

What’s even more surprising is that the United Kingdom—idolized by every good progressive liberal for their strict gun legislation—is, according to the European Commission, the most violent country in Europe. The rate of violent crimes with firearms has in fact doubled since the ban on guns was implemented after the Dublin shootings 20 years ago. According to the Home Office, England and Wales had over 762,515 violent crimes in 2011 alone. For a population of only 56 million, that comes out to a ratio of roughly 1,361 violent crimes per 100,000. That is 3.5 times higher than in the U.S.

Looking closely at the facts, it is evident not only that violence does not decrease with increased legislation, but that the opposite is true: the decrease of legally obtainable weapons leads to an increase in violence. The obvious conclusion is that in either case, people who use firearms for harm do not obtain them legally.

It is true that the U.K. has a slightly lower murder rate—only 1.3 compared to the U.S.’s 4.7— however, there are other factors to consider. The bulk of murders take place in small pockets in metropolitan areas of over 250,000 people. The U.S. has 186 of these metropolitan areas whereas the U.K. only has 32. Needless to say we are just scratching the surface when considering the complexities behind these tragedies.

It is clear that the solution does not lie within stricter gun laws. To suggest such a thing would be to ignore the facts. For example, both Chicago and NYC have a total ban on firearms, yet both cities are at the top of the charts for murder rates. So why would creating more gun restrictions better anything?

The statistics make the suggestions of gun-control seem even more ludicrous. According to the EU Commission the U.S. is not even in the top 25 most violent modern nations. The U.K., Austria, France, Sweden, Finland, and even Canada are ahead in violent crime rates. Based on the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission data, guns aren’t even in the top 10 most common reasons for emergency room visits. Yet the media has a heyday every time there is a violent crime in America. It makes a better story to talk about one crazy man on psychotropic drugs shooting up a school in a state possessing some of the strictest gun laws in place, than to mention the mother in Colorado protecting her twin infants by taking down a home-invader with her .38 special, or the 15 year old boy in Houston who defended his sister against 4 armed home-invaders with his father’s legally obtained AR-15, or, most notably, the woman carrying a concealed weapon at the Hobbit premiere in San Antonio who took down Jesus Garcia, preventing what would have surely resulted in another Aurora-style slaughter. There are countless stories of law abiding citizens defending themselves with legally-obtained weapons.

This is a sensitive issue to be sure. But realize that where the insensitivity lies is in those who manipulate facts surrounding tragic events in order to push their agenda and increase government control.

Our time and energy would be better spent in figuring out how to decrease unemployment and poverty and fix the education systems within the areas with high crime rates, rather than attempting to deprive law abiding citizens of a chance to defend themselves against rapists, home-invaders, and criminals who gain access to illegal weapons.