This article was for Ken Hare's class in early November 06. We had to hear Don Logan speak and then write an article.
According to Don Logan the chairman of Time Warner who has experience and extensive background in the field of journalism, there are “four principles that are critical to the journalism profession: credibility, independence, ethics, and quality.”
In a newscast that is already jammed for time, WSFA feels compelled to create a minute towards an opinion spoken by their general manager.
For example, Alabamians are voting on Amendment 2, which is an amendment to require all counties to have a minimum of 10 mills of property tax to account for education funding.
WSFA has now played the Amendment 2 opinion twice. The opinion was shown last week. Then, the same opinion was shown on the eve of the statewide election, which included the vote on Amendment 2.
The news station of WSFA is giving the citizens of Montgomery and the tri-county area a disservice.
They are campaigning and pushing for Amendment 2.
Ethics should be questioned.
The opinion also made Amendment 2 a wedge issue.
During the general manager’s spoken opinion, graphics of young children in education settings were used. Then, at the end of the opinion, “Vote YES on Amendment 2.”
How is one portrayed with a vote of NO? If one votes no, then one must not care about the education of children.
Does the word ethics hold any water?
WSFA’s six o’ clock newscast consists of: sports, plugging their website wsfa.com, flashy graphics, music, three segments of weather, and now a minute of the general manager’s opinion. All of the elements just listed take away precious time from this thing called “news.”
The Montgomery local news leader finds itself covering sports stories in the segments designated for news. Last week, during a six o’ clock newscast, WSFA covered a high school football game, which included two, playoff bound football teams in Luverne and Brantley. The story could have easily been presented in the Sports block of the newscast.
WSFA is lacking quality.
Apparently, quality in journalism is becoming an issue. According to a 2004 poll conducted by people-press.org, quality of coverage was the second biggest issue on the local level. Quality of coverage was the second biggest problem with thirty- three percent, only trailing Business and Financial with thirty-five percent.
In a recent Montgomery Advertiser article, two Montgomery City department heads received a pay increase, while other city employees have yet to receive their merit raises.
What’s the hold up?
The budget has yet to be passed. In fact, the City of Montgomery is working off of last year’s budget.
Where is WSFA?
Yes, they are covering the delay of the passing of the new budget, but they have failed to pressure city government in regards to the two department heads pay raise.
Opinions in a thirty minute nightly news show should be treated like the seperation church and state to government.
Cable news have blocks of news. Then, there are talking heads such as: LouDobbs, Paula Zaun, Bill O' Reilly, Chris Matthews, and Tucker Carlson.
They are never mixed together.
If WSFA wants to get into the opinion of things, so be it. Just don't waste a whole minute of it and cut into actual news time. If the general manager wants to do his own little blog and thus, plug the website once more, that is fine. Opinion is not appropriate in an already crammed thirty minute newcast (less than thirty minutes of a newscast due to commericals).
Newspapers endorce political candidates in the opinion section. Opinions or endorcements made by the Montgomery Advertiser are never made directly next to or in an article in relation to an election race or issue.
News is always around and available to be found. News of substance also follows suit. WSFA must realize that news is not just a crime report here and there followed by a blueberry, peanut, watermelon, or anything under the sun fesival happening in rural, small town Alabama.
While WSFA’s news coverage has recently been soft, their fascination with music and flashy graphics has intensified. WSFA appears now to favor presentation over the actual product. One is inundated with an attempt to lure you in with hype due to the mood of the music and the urgency of “breaking news” and “top story” in eye popping colors and blinking and moving words. Despite all of this, one can expect to sometimes find the hyped story only to fall prey to the teleprompter and/or video malfunction.
Watching a WSFA preview feels more so of a movie preview than of a news segment.
WSFA is failing to meet two of the four journalism priciples stated by Don Logan and failing the citizens of the tri-county area.
Sunday, September 23, 2007
Tuesday, September 11, 2007
Another AUM Editorial
Similar to the other one, but this one was for Ken Hare's class:
Auburn University Montgomery has once again proved that there is a strong disconnect between the administration and the student body.
AUM once offered a three-pay and four-pay payment plan. As difficult as paying tuition has become, these payment plans offered students and their families an alternative to bank loans and student loans.
Last year, and giving students a rather short notice, AUM enforced a payment plan that required 50 percent of total tuition for a semester to be paid upfront. Following a payment of 50 percent, students were required to pay the remaining balance over a two-month period.
Now, AUM has taken more flexibility away from students despite continued tuition increases.
The current payment plan required 50 percent to be paid by Jan. 5, 2007. The remaining balance will no longer be paid over a two month time period. Students must now make the full payment by Jan. 14, 2007, or they will not be able to keep their registered class schedule.
Currently, 12 credit hours cost $1912, including fees.
AUM has offered an alternative, but not in the way of a payment plan. The alternative is a loan program.
Basically, AUM is all, but forcing students and families to pay tuition via bank loan. Most use the payment plan in order to avoid taking out a loan and/or the hassle of going through a bank.
Enrollment has not increased despite a strong campaign to do so with billboards and television commercials. According to aum.edu, enrollment for undergraduate students was 4300 for the fall semesters of 2005 and 2006.
According to a 2006 issue of the Montgomery Advertiser, AUM spent $20,000 on an independent study of people’s perception of AUM. Five hundred people were surveyed either via phone, online surveys, or interviews. One of the main issues of the surveys was “internal and external communications.”
Despite the independent study hearing of internal and external communications, AUM gave students less than a two-month notice of the new reformed payment plan.
Yes, AUM should do everything in its power to appeal to as many people as possible, but when an institution is in heavy debt, the school cannot afford to go deeper in debt.
According to an Aumnibus January 2006 article, “AUM housing is $1.9 million in debt with no money in reserve.” What is likely to happen when no money is in reserve? Raise the rates. After all, a raise to an “interim” president can be justified in this time of an across the board increase of costs on students.
Most of us know how popular sports are in this state. There is so much popularity that sports, preferably college, has the second largest base only behind Southern Baptist. AUM recently made a strong push to move AUM athletics into NCAA Division II status. While serious talks of the move began, the Athletic Department of AUM was not making their ends meet. According to documents obtained by the Aumnibus, as of May 1, AUM’s Athletic Department remains $400,000 in debt.
The move to the NCAA level would more than likely not raise morale at AUM. In fact, the move might cause a decline.
Think about it.
The majority of the students attending AUM came for academic reasons. Yes, the thought of AUM becoming an NCAA institution sounds great, but the sports we have are not truly supported by the students. All a student has to do is show their student identification and can watch a sporting event for little to no cost. The only time the gym seems to be full is at graduation or whenever a United States president stops for a visit.
How can AUM fund the move to the NCAA, when an infamous parking fee is regularly presented to go towards maintaining school parking lots? Throw in the numerous tuition increases and the situation looks misleading to the student body. Again, this does not add up.
The AUM administration appears to be going in the opposite direction of its priorities. Priorities should be taken care of first. Without the priority (students) there would not be an AUM.
Auburn University Montgomery has once again proved that there is a strong disconnect between the administration and the student body.
AUM once offered a three-pay and four-pay payment plan. As difficult as paying tuition has become, these payment plans offered students and their families an alternative to bank loans and student loans.
Last year, and giving students a rather short notice, AUM enforced a payment plan that required 50 percent of total tuition for a semester to be paid upfront. Following a payment of 50 percent, students were required to pay the remaining balance over a two-month period.
Now, AUM has taken more flexibility away from students despite continued tuition increases.
The current payment plan required 50 percent to be paid by Jan. 5, 2007. The remaining balance will no longer be paid over a two month time period. Students must now make the full payment by Jan. 14, 2007, or they will not be able to keep their registered class schedule.
Currently, 12 credit hours cost $1912, including fees.
AUM has offered an alternative, but not in the way of a payment plan. The alternative is a loan program.
Basically, AUM is all, but forcing students and families to pay tuition via bank loan. Most use the payment plan in order to avoid taking out a loan and/or the hassle of going through a bank.
Enrollment has not increased despite a strong campaign to do so with billboards and television commercials. According to aum.edu, enrollment for undergraduate students was 4300 for the fall semesters of 2005 and 2006.
According to a 2006 issue of the Montgomery Advertiser, AUM spent $20,000 on an independent study of people’s perception of AUM. Five hundred people were surveyed either via phone, online surveys, or interviews. One of the main issues of the surveys was “internal and external communications.”
Despite the independent study hearing of internal and external communications, AUM gave students less than a two-month notice of the new reformed payment plan.
Yes, AUM should do everything in its power to appeal to as many people as possible, but when an institution is in heavy debt, the school cannot afford to go deeper in debt.
According to an Aumnibus January 2006 article, “AUM housing is $1.9 million in debt with no money in reserve.” What is likely to happen when no money is in reserve? Raise the rates. After all, a raise to an “interim” president can be justified in this time of an across the board increase of costs on students.
Most of us know how popular sports are in this state. There is so much popularity that sports, preferably college, has the second largest base only behind Southern Baptist. AUM recently made a strong push to move AUM athletics into NCAA Division II status. While serious talks of the move began, the Athletic Department of AUM was not making their ends meet. According to documents obtained by the Aumnibus, as of May 1, AUM’s Athletic Department remains $400,000 in debt.
The move to the NCAA level would more than likely not raise morale at AUM. In fact, the move might cause a decline.
Think about it.
The majority of the students attending AUM came for academic reasons. Yes, the thought of AUM becoming an NCAA institution sounds great, but the sports we have are not truly supported by the students. All a student has to do is show their student identification and can watch a sporting event for little to no cost. The only time the gym seems to be full is at graduation or whenever a United States president stops for a visit.
How can AUM fund the move to the NCAA, when an infamous parking fee is regularly presented to go towards maintaining school parking lots? Throw in the numerous tuition increases and the situation looks misleading to the student body. Again, this does not add up.
The AUM administration appears to be going in the opposite direction of its priorities. Priorities should be taken care of first. Without the priority (students) there would not be an AUM.
AUM Payment Plan
This is an editorial I wrote concerning AUM's payment plan.
Here we go again.
AUM has taken more flexibility away from students despite continued tuition increases.
AUM once offered a three-pay and four-pay payment plan. As difficult as paying tuition has become, these payment plans offered students and their families an alternative to bank loans and student loans.
In 2005, and giving students a rather short notice, AUM enforced a payment plan that required 50 percent of total tuition for a semester to be paid upfront. Following a payment of 50 percent, students were required to pay the remaining balance over a two-month period.
T he current payment plan required 50 percent to be paid by Jan. 5, 2007. The remaining balance will no longer be paid over a two month time period. Students must now make the full payment by Jan. 14, 2007, or they will not be able to keep their registered class schedule.
Currently, 12 credit hours cost $1912, including fees.
AUM has offered an alternative, but not in the way of a payment plan. The alternative is a loan program.
In a letter dated Nov. 21st, AUM announced that Bank Trust would take over the more flexible aspect of tuition payment plans.
The letter was obviously written as positive as possible. If one was not yet nauseous after reading the beginning, then most stomachs should have turned away from their Thanksgiving meals when they read the glistened, public relation touch of “AUM is proud to partner with Bank Trust to offer this service to its students. In addition to ease of service, students will benefit from opportunities to establish credit and develop with a respected financial institution.”
Give me a break.
Sounds as if one is reading a business letter. Only problem is that AUM is not a business. They fall under the state umbrella of public universities.
Nowhere in the letter was a logical explanation for the move to the loan program, but they did not fail to mention every method of payment if one could manage making two lump sum payments in ten days.
The only logical reason for the move to the loan program is perhaps too many students neglected to fulfill payments on the payment plan. While this may be the case, when one signed and agreed to the payment plan, all collection fees and cost are the student’s responsibility, not AUM’s.
The easy answer to that problem is to take note of those who failed to finish payments on the plan and take away their eligibility. Do not proceed in punishing the ones who kept their word.
Basically, AUM is all, but forcing students and families to pay tuition via bank loan. Most use the payment plan in order to avoid taking out a loan and/or the hassle of going through a bank.
According to a 2006 issue of the Montgomery Advertiser, AUM spent $20,000 on an independent study of people’s perception of AUM. Five hundred people were surveyed either via phone, online surveys, or interviews. One of the main issues of the surveys was “internal and external communications.”
Despite the independent study hearing of internal and external communications, AUM gave students less than a two-month notice of the new reformed payment plan. What made matters worse is that students and parents had the holiday season to also contend with.
Hopefully, Santa was extra special to everyone this go around or needy students happened to stumble upon a money tree.
Here we go again.
AUM has taken more flexibility away from students despite continued tuition increases.
AUM once offered a three-pay and four-pay payment plan. As difficult as paying tuition has become, these payment plans offered students and their families an alternative to bank loans and student loans.
In 2005, and giving students a rather short notice, AUM enforced a payment plan that required 50 percent of total tuition for a semester to be paid upfront. Following a payment of 50 percent, students were required to pay the remaining balance over a two-month period.
T he current payment plan required 50 percent to be paid by Jan. 5, 2007. The remaining balance will no longer be paid over a two month time period. Students must now make the full payment by Jan. 14, 2007, or they will not be able to keep their registered class schedule.
Currently, 12 credit hours cost $1912, including fees.
AUM has offered an alternative, but not in the way of a payment plan. The alternative is a loan program.
In a letter dated Nov. 21st, AUM announced that Bank Trust would take over the more flexible aspect of tuition payment plans.
The letter was obviously written as positive as possible. If one was not yet nauseous after reading the beginning, then most stomachs should have turned away from their Thanksgiving meals when they read the glistened, public relation touch of “AUM is proud to partner with Bank Trust to offer this service to its students. In addition to ease of service, students will benefit from opportunities to establish credit and develop with a respected financial institution.”
Give me a break.
Sounds as if one is reading a business letter. Only problem is that AUM is not a business. They fall under the state umbrella of public universities.
Nowhere in the letter was a logical explanation for the move to the loan program, but they did not fail to mention every method of payment if one could manage making two lump sum payments in ten days.
The only logical reason for the move to the loan program is perhaps too many students neglected to fulfill payments on the payment plan. While this may be the case, when one signed and agreed to the payment plan, all collection fees and cost are the student’s responsibility, not AUM’s.
The easy answer to that problem is to take note of those who failed to finish payments on the plan and take away their eligibility. Do not proceed in punishing the ones who kept their word.
Basically, AUM is all, but forcing students and families to pay tuition via bank loan. Most use the payment plan in order to avoid taking out a loan and/or the hassle of going through a bank.
According to a 2006 issue of the Montgomery Advertiser, AUM spent $20,000 on an independent study of people’s perception of AUM. Five hundred people were surveyed either via phone, online surveys, or interviews. One of the main issues of the surveys was “internal and external communications.”
Despite the independent study hearing of internal and external communications, AUM gave students less than a two-month notice of the new reformed payment plan. What made matters worse is that students and parents had the holiday season to also contend with.
Hopefully, Santa was extra special to everyone this go around or needy students happened to stumble upon a money tree.
Alabama Football and the name "Mike"
The indenting on this blog is odd. I know how to indent. I'm copy and pasting them from Word. This is an editorial I wrote for Ken Hare's class:
Alabama finally decided to shop for a guy not named "Mike."
Mike Dubose coached Bama from 1997-2000. Dubose led Alabama to a 10-3 record in 1999, including two wins over Steve Spurrier and the Florida Gators. The second win over Florida came in the SEC Championship game. Alabama also made an appearance in the Orange bowl, but fell to Michigan in overtime due to a missed extra point. In 2000, despite the graduation of a great running back in Shaun Alexander, Alabama was given a preseason #3 ranking. Bama lost it's first game of the season to UCLA , and the team fell apart on and off the field. Dubose was fired before season's end. Bama finished the 2000 campaign with a staggering 3-8 record.
During the search for a coach after Dubose's firing, Oregon State head coach Mike Riley was a strong candidate. In fact, probably had the job, but held out too long for Alabama. Thus, Dennis Franchione 's two year stint. Mike Riley remains the current Oregon State coach. The Beavers gave USC their first loss of the 2006 season.
After Franchione headed to College Station to coach the Aggies of Texas A&M, Mike Price was hired. Price, “It's rolling baby”, came from Washington State and fresh off a Rose Bowl appearance. He would never coach a game at Alabama. He would have no doubt been a better coach than Shula, but Price could not keep his behavior in tact. He was fired not too long after spring practice. Apparently it was Alabama’s fate or “Destiny.” He is currently the head coach of University Texas El Paso.
Mike Shula, the most recent coach and “Mike”, finished his four year term with a medicore at best, 26-23 record. Of the twenty-six wins, only three of the wins were against ranked teams. Plus, add to the fact that numerous wins came against cupcakes such as Florida International, Louisiana Monroe, Utah State, and the lower tier of the SEC. Alabama had the talent to win most of it's games this past season, but coaching proved to be the pitfall. Alabama had Auburn in its grasps, as well as Arkansas and Tennessee. Shula just was not a great coach. Too conservative. Not creative.
After the termination of Shula, the Tide pursued Miami Dolphins head coach Nick Saban. He showed no public interest in taking the job at Alabama. So from there, the Tide met with West Virginia head coach Rich Rodriguez . Soon after, a deal was made public. Rodriguez agreed to the deal in principle. Instead of a job acceptance press conference, he reversed his decision and turned down the Tide.
The Alabama football program had hit its lowest point. Losing to your arch-rival 5 years in a row and not being able to maintain a coach are two main ingredients for a disaster.
They were considered a laughing stock.
So who was Alabama to pursue next?
Nick Saban?
Been there, done that.
They yet again pursued Saban.
Have to admire Athletic Director Mal Moore or at least see the desperation to restore the football program.
Moore waited until the end of the NFL regular season to contact Saban. A deal was presented. Days later, he agreed. Moore and Alabama knew they could not afford another bad hire, so they only offered a contract that would not only make him the highest paid coach in the Southeastern Conference, but in all of college football. In a recent espn.com article, the contract is $32 million for eight years, which equals $4 million a year.
Some Alabama fans remained apprehensive and made sure to hold back a reaction until the press conference.
The Bama Nation went from getting coal at Christmas to having a shiny, new, proven, head football coach.
Although Saban coached two seasons at the Miami Dolphins, he is no stranger to the Southeastern Conference.
Saban coached the LSU Tigers from 2000-2004. He posted five straight winning seasons, including two SEC Championships (01’ and 03’) and a National Championship (03’).
Fans are happy and excited about the hire. Also happy is Alabama Athletic Director Mal Moore. As the last several years have been an embarassment to the football program, Moore should go ahead and retire. He can leave the program on a high, insecure note.
Alabama finally decided to shop for a guy not named "Mike."
Mike Dubose coached Bama from 1997-2000. Dubose led Alabama to a 10-3 record in 1999, including two wins over Steve Spurrier and the Florida Gators. The second win over Florida came in the SEC Championship game. Alabama also made an appearance in the Orange bowl, but fell to Michigan in overtime due to a missed extra point. In 2000, despite the graduation of a great running back in Shaun Alexander, Alabama was given a preseason #3 ranking. Bama lost it's first game of the season to UCLA , and the team fell apart on and off the field. Dubose was fired before season's end. Bama finished the 2000 campaign with a staggering 3-8 record.
During the search for a coach after Dubose's firing, Oregon State head coach Mike Riley was a strong candidate. In fact, probably had the job, but held out too long for Alabama. Thus, Dennis Franchione 's two year stint. Mike Riley remains the current Oregon State coach. The Beavers gave USC their first loss of the 2006 season.
After Franchione headed to College Station to coach the Aggies of Texas A&M, Mike Price was hired. Price, “It's rolling baby”, came from Washington State and fresh off a Rose Bowl appearance. He would never coach a game at Alabama. He would have no doubt been a better coach than Shula, but Price could not keep his behavior in tact. He was fired not too long after spring practice. Apparently it was Alabama’s fate or “Destiny.” He is currently the head coach of University Texas El Paso.
Mike Shula, the most recent coach and “Mike”, finished his four year term with a medicore at best, 26-23 record. Of the twenty-six wins, only three of the wins were against ranked teams. Plus, add to the fact that numerous wins came against cupcakes such as Florida International, Louisiana Monroe, Utah State, and the lower tier of the SEC. Alabama had the talent to win most of it's games this past season, but coaching proved to be the pitfall. Alabama had Auburn in its grasps, as well as Arkansas and Tennessee. Shula just was not a great coach. Too conservative. Not creative.
After the termination of Shula, the Tide pursued Miami Dolphins head coach Nick Saban. He showed no public interest in taking the job at Alabama. So from there, the Tide met with West Virginia head coach Rich Rodriguez . Soon after, a deal was made public. Rodriguez agreed to the deal in principle. Instead of a job acceptance press conference, he reversed his decision and turned down the Tide.
The Alabama football program had hit its lowest point. Losing to your arch-rival 5 years in a row and not being able to maintain a coach are two main ingredients for a disaster.
They were considered a laughing stock.
So who was Alabama to pursue next?
Nick Saban?
Been there, done that.
They yet again pursued Saban.
Have to admire Athletic Director Mal Moore or at least see the desperation to restore the football program.
Moore waited until the end of the NFL regular season to contact Saban. A deal was presented. Days later, he agreed. Moore and Alabama knew they could not afford another bad hire, so they only offered a contract that would not only make him the highest paid coach in the Southeastern Conference, but in all of college football. In a recent espn.com article, the contract is $32 million for eight years, which equals $4 million a year.
Some Alabama fans remained apprehensive and made sure to hold back a reaction until the press conference.
The Bama Nation went from getting coal at Christmas to having a shiny, new, proven, head football coach.
Although Saban coached two seasons at the Miami Dolphins, he is no stranger to the Southeastern Conference.
Saban coached the LSU Tigers from 2000-2004. He posted five straight winning seasons, including two SEC Championships (01’ and 03’) and a National Championship (03’).
Fans are happy and excited about the hire. Also happy is Alabama Athletic Director Mal Moore. As the last several years have been an embarassment to the football program, Moore should go ahead and retire. He can leave the program on a high, insecure note.
Auburn Basketball Editorial
This is an editorial I wrote earlier this year about Auburn Basketball:
The Auburn basketball program appeared to be left for dead.
Gone were the days of NCAA tournament appearances.
At this point, the Auburn faithful would be pleased with a mere National Invitational Tournament bid, which is a tournament of teams who do not quite have a good enough record to make the Big Dance.
After two consecutive losing seasons, things were bleak.
Jeff Lebo knew that building the program to a winning level would be an uphill battle.
Then, things got worse. Auburn started the 2006-2007 season with a loss to AUM, which is not even an NCAA institution. Granted the game was an exhibition and not marked for the record books, but the damage had been done. The only thing left to do is look forward. The program could not fall any further.
No need for Lebo to pull his hair out. After all, he has no hair to pull.
Auburn went into conference play with a decent 10-5 record. All the wins came against mid-level to lower tier competition. Four of their five losses came against ranked opponents: Oklahoma State, Wisconsin, Pittsburgh, and Texas A&M.
Auburn began conference play with a win against Vanderbilt. The winning ways were short lived as Kentucky easily defeated the Tigers. Then, Auburn lost in Baton Rouge to the ranked LSU Tigers. Auburn gave LSU all they could handle and then some, but it still was not enough. Auburn fell 65-63.
Despite the loss, Auburn was hanging with the best of them.
The Tigers went into the Tennessee game with an overall record of 11-7 and (1-2) in Southeastern Conference play. The Vols came in with a top 25 ranking.
Auburn and Tennessee went back and fourth with ties and lead changes. Then, midway through the second half, Auburn began to slide and found themselves trailing by 14.
Then, in a change of events, Tennessee had a complete meltdown. They could not hit a shot. Plus, they were not protecting the ball.
Auburn went on an 18-0 run and to victory as they beat the Volunteers 83-80 in front of a near (if you remove 5,000 of the over 10,000 seat capacity in Beard Eaves Memorial Coliseum) sellout crowd.
Auburn now sits at (2-2) in conference play and 12-7 overall. The 12 wins already match last season’s total.
The win against Tennessee gave Auburn confidence and a legitimate shot of exiting the cellar of the SEC West.
The players and coaches were ecstatic.
The fans celebrated just like they did when the football team won the Iron Bowl a couple of months back, well… almost.
The Auburn basketball program appeared to be left for dead.
Gone were the days of NCAA tournament appearances.
At this point, the Auburn faithful would be pleased with a mere National Invitational Tournament bid, which is a tournament of teams who do not quite have a good enough record to make the Big Dance.
After two consecutive losing seasons, things were bleak.
Jeff Lebo knew that building the program to a winning level would be an uphill battle.
Then, things got worse. Auburn started the 2006-2007 season with a loss to AUM, which is not even an NCAA institution. Granted the game was an exhibition and not marked for the record books, but the damage had been done. The only thing left to do is look forward. The program could not fall any further.
No need for Lebo to pull his hair out. After all, he has no hair to pull.
Auburn went into conference play with a decent 10-5 record. All the wins came against mid-level to lower tier competition. Four of their five losses came against ranked opponents: Oklahoma State, Wisconsin, Pittsburgh, and Texas A&M.
Auburn began conference play with a win against Vanderbilt. The winning ways were short lived as Kentucky easily defeated the Tigers. Then, Auburn lost in Baton Rouge to the ranked LSU Tigers. Auburn gave LSU all they could handle and then some, but it still was not enough. Auburn fell 65-63.
Despite the loss, Auburn was hanging with the best of them.
The Tigers went into the Tennessee game with an overall record of 11-7 and (1-2) in Southeastern Conference play. The Vols came in with a top 25 ranking.
Auburn and Tennessee went back and fourth with ties and lead changes. Then, midway through the second half, Auburn began to slide and found themselves trailing by 14.
Then, in a change of events, Tennessee had a complete meltdown. They could not hit a shot. Plus, they were not protecting the ball.
Auburn went on an 18-0 run and to victory as they beat the Volunteers 83-80 in front of a near (if you remove 5,000 of the over 10,000 seat capacity in Beard Eaves Memorial Coliseum) sellout crowd.
Auburn now sits at (2-2) in conference play and 12-7 overall. The 12 wins already match last season’s total.
The win against Tennessee gave Auburn confidence and a legitimate shot of exiting the cellar of the SEC West.
The players and coaches were ecstatic.
The fans celebrated just like they did when the football team won the Iron Bowl a couple of months back, well… almost.
Minimum Wage Editorial
This is an editorial I wrote about a year ago for Ken Hare's class:
A double-edged sword determines the fate of our economy.
The sword has a name.
Capitalism.
The federal government does not need to increase the minimum wage. Leave the decision to increase the wage to the states. The federal government cannot control every aspect of state government. They cannot control the rates of sales tax, state income tax, and property tax that states pass on to their citizens. If one wants to go deeper, tax goes further into states via county and city.
The federal minimum wage is $5.15. Yet, not every state has a minimum wage of $5.15. In a state-by-state breakdown of minimum wage figures by dol.gov, 20 states have a different minimum wage than the federal wage. Some states, such as New York, recently had an increase take affect. In New Jersey, an increase took affect as of Oct. 1, 2006. Currently, Alabama does not have a minimum wage law.
Democrats in Congress are trying to push an increase of the current federal minimum wage to $7.25. Even at $7.25 that still may not be enough to pull a family out or completely out of poverty.
A recent Birmingham News article found that “the national average poverty threshold for a family of four in 2005 was $19,971, and $9, 973 for individuals.”
Living off $5.15 an hour varies from state to state. Cost of living is the reason. Someone making $5.15 should expect his or her dollar value to shrink if they were to live in some northeastern states and such states as California.
The tax base is a factor.
Alabama has one of the lowest tax bases in the country.
According to a report of the U.S. Census, in 2005 Alabama ranked 44th in total state tax per capita with $1,711.27. In the highest state tax per capita is in Vermont with $3,600.16. The lowest state tax per capita is in South Dakota with $ 1,430.46
Currently, Vermont has a minimum wage of $7.25, while currently in South Dakota the minimum wage is $5.15. Again, the minimum wage figures are courtesy of dol.gov.
According to lucybaxley.com, Lucy Baxley, recently defeated Democratic candidate for governor in Alabama, wanted to push legislation to increase Alabama’s minimum wage from the current rate of $5.15 to $6.15. As of now, no legislation for a minimum wage hike has been presented.
Alabama should not start with an increase in minimum wage, but rather adjusting their state taxes. Granted, Alabama has a low tax base, but the state also has a regressive 4 percent state sales tax. The sales tax includes necessities such as groceries and medication. In some areas, with the combination of city and county sales tax, sales tax has reached as high as 10 percent. Currently, the sales tax rate in the city of Montgomery is 10 percent. Obviously, making $5.15, while buying groceries at a 10 percent tax rate will result in a rather empty shopping cart and an empty wallet.
From one extreme to the other, do we want to raise minimum wage to $10.00? Do we want minimum wage to remain $5.15 for another eight years?
The fact of the matter is poor people will always exist in the United States and Alabama. To a degree the phrase “survival of the fittest” comes to mind.
Most love the idea of a day where poverty is extinct. We have to be realistic. No matter how well the economy has flourished, boomed, and thrived in the past, poverty still remained.
The federal government should not try to force a higher minimum wage. Everything that is bought across the country is not bought at the same price. Plus, add to the fact that everything bought is not taxed at the same rate.
Personal responsibility must be a factor somewhere in all of this. No government can eliminate poverty on its own. For the person or persons must fight their way out of the dark. People should not solely rely on government to bail them out of every situation. The more society relies on government, the more society is setting itself up for a downfall, i.e. Hurricane Katrina. If illegal immigrants can come across the border with nothing more than the clothes on their back, and take any job to support him or her and their family, the future battles with poverty does not bode well for the U. S. Nobody in this country is forced to live in poverty. No doubt, obstacles are imminent, but it also boils down to the motivation and desire of the person.
A double-edged sword determines the fate of our economy.
The sword has a name.
Capitalism.
The federal government does not need to increase the minimum wage. Leave the decision to increase the wage to the states. The federal government cannot control every aspect of state government. They cannot control the rates of sales tax, state income tax, and property tax that states pass on to their citizens. If one wants to go deeper, tax goes further into states via county and city.
The federal minimum wage is $5.15. Yet, not every state has a minimum wage of $5.15. In a state-by-state breakdown of minimum wage figures by dol.gov, 20 states have a different minimum wage than the federal wage. Some states, such as New York, recently had an increase take affect. In New Jersey, an increase took affect as of Oct. 1, 2006. Currently, Alabama does not have a minimum wage law.
Democrats in Congress are trying to push an increase of the current federal minimum wage to $7.25. Even at $7.25 that still may not be enough to pull a family out or completely out of poverty.
A recent Birmingham News article found that “the national average poverty threshold for a family of four in 2005 was $19,971, and $9, 973 for individuals.”
Living off $5.15 an hour varies from state to state. Cost of living is the reason. Someone making $5.15 should expect his or her dollar value to shrink if they were to live in some northeastern states and such states as California.
The tax base is a factor.
Alabama has one of the lowest tax bases in the country.
According to a report of the U.S. Census, in 2005 Alabama ranked 44th in total state tax per capita with $1,711.27. In the highest state tax per capita is in Vermont with $3,600.16. The lowest state tax per capita is in South Dakota with $ 1,430.46
Currently, Vermont has a minimum wage of $7.25, while currently in South Dakota the minimum wage is $5.15. Again, the minimum wage figures are courtesy of dol.gov.
According to lucybaxley.com, Lucy Baxley, recently defeated Democratic candidate for governor in Alabama, wanted to push legislation to increase Alabama’s minimum wage from the current rate of $5.15 to $6.15. As of now, no legislation for a minimum wage hike has been presented.
Alabama should not start with an increase in minimum wage, but rather adjusting their state taxes. Granted, Alabama has a low tax base, but the state also has a regressive 4 percent state sales tax. The sales tax includes necessities such as groceries and medication. In some areas, with the combination of city and county sales tax, sales tax has reached as high as 10 percent. Currently, the sales tax rate in the city of Montgomery is 10 percent. Obviously, making $5.15, while buying groceries at a 10 percent tax rate will result in a rather empty shopping cart and an empty wallet.
From one extreme to the other, do we want to raise minimum wage to $10.00? Do we want minimum wage to remain $5.15 for another eight years?
The fact of the matter is poor people will always exist in the United States and Alabama. To a degree the phrase “survival of the fittest” comes to mind.
Most love the idea of a day where poverty is extinct. We have to be realistic. No matter how well the economy has flourished, boomed, and thrived in the past, poverty still remained.
The federal government should not try to force a higher minimum wage. Everything that is bought across the country is not bought at the same price. Plus, add to the fact that everything bought is not taxed at the same rate.
Personal responsibility must be a factor somewhere in all of this. No government can eliminate poverty on its own. For the person or persons must fight their way out of the dark. People should not solely rely on government to bail them out of every situation. The more society relies on government, the more society is setting itself up for a downfall, i.e. Hurricane Katrina. If illegal immigrants can come across the border with nothing more than the clothes on their back, and take any job to support him or her and their family, the future battles with poverty does not bode well for the U. S. Nobody in this country is forced to live in poverty. No doubt, obstacles are imminent, but it also boils down to the motivation and desire of the person.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)