Ask almost any UC Davis student what they think of the quarter system and they’ll tell you, for better or worse, that it’s fast. This is particularly true at the beginning of the year when classes just seem to rear up behind you. It can be difficult to think beyond a few days. But chances are you’re thinking nevertheless — about politics, your job, the economy or maybe just where to get a good burger.

This is where the Opinion Desk comes in.

We provide a forum for campus dialogue in which your original thoughts are formalized into writing, edited and sent out to a wide audience. Presenting the great diversity of beliefs across UC Davis is this desk’s primary objective. But we can only do that with the participation of students, faculty and the community at large.

It shouldn’t come as a surprise that, as a college newspaper, the opinions published by this desk can err towards the progressive side. But might doesn’t make right. We are always looking for clear, informed writing — no matter what the author’s specific inclinations may be. It’s important that readers of the Aggie’s opinion section can expect a wide range of viewpoints.

And this year, your opinion is more important than ever.

We are in the early stages of a presidential election. For the next fourteen months, attention will be given to issues that might not have otherwise been a priority. This fundamental characteristic of federal elections in America is demonstrated by Donald Trump’s rhetoric on illegal immigration — an issue that has been increasingly covered by the media.

But immigration won’t be the only topic that gets an increased share of attention.

Issues that directly affect UC Davis students will be analyzed. Questions about funding higher education, interest rates on student loans and the implementation of President Obama’s free community college plan are already in a position to take the spotlight.

Colleges have a unique ability to shape national discourse. Take Emma Sulkowicz, a graduate of Columbia University who gained notoriety for carrying her mattress everywhere around campus to protest the university’s handling of her rape case. That story was featured prominently in news outlets across the nation.

Divestment is another issue which has been strongly associated with campus movements. At UC Davis, Student Resolution 17 (SR17), which called for the University of California to divest its holdings in companies associated with the the Israeli occupation of Palestine, was passed after a similar resolution, SR9, was deemed unconstitutional.

The debate that intervened during those proceedings was characterized by protests, walk-outs and sit- ins. Multiple instances of anti-semitic vandalism, that may or may not have been a result of the controversy, added to tension on campus.

The divestment movement at UC Davis shows us that we need to remain respectful when our opinions differ. SR9 was ruled unconstitutional because ASUCD’s judicial branch found that the resolution did not explicitly address its potential effect on student welfare. When The California Aggie ran an op-ed criticizing pro-divestment ASUCD senator Azka Fayyaz, a sit-in was held by some of her supporters in the newspaper’s offices.  

Often, and as were the cases of SR9 and the Aggie’s op-ed, the trouble will be found in the language.

For that reason, the Opinion Desk will continue to take great measures to ensure that no group is needlessly offended because of how something is written. Still, opinions are naturally divisive, and there is great value in having one’s particular viewpoint challenged. This desk intends to publish material that does as much.

To first-year or transfer students who may be unfamiliar with the quarter system, I encourage you to be a part of this student dialogue. Because this system is so intense, make your participation part of a routine from the get-go. To returning students, there is still time left.

To submit a guest opinion, email opinion@theaggie.org. You can pitch an idea, send your take on something happening on campus or draw a cartoon that you think sums up your point of view. The Opinion Desk welcomes all submissions.  

Or you can involve yourself in one of the easiest ways possible: by reading The California Aggie.

We love it when you read us.

Eli Flesch is the Opinion Editor for The California Aggie. Reach him at ekflesch@ucdavis.edu.

Graphic designed by Hee-Ah Yoo.

Last week, in an article entitled “The California-Upward Mobility Machine,” The New York Times described how University of California (UC) budget issues haven’t prevented the system from catering to low income students. A related article ranked UC Davis second on a list of colleges “doing the most for low income students.” The list measured schools, in part, on the share of their students receiving federally funded Pell grants, their graduation rates and the tuition charged to lower-and-middle-income students.

The Times used these results to form what they called “The College Access Index.” The average score was one, and UC Davis scored 1.62. UC Irvine, the highest ranked school, scored 1.91. Six out of the top seven schools were UC’s.

The Editorial Board commends UC Davis for taking the steps required to achieve this score.

Students have questioned how universities might respond to growing levels of income inequality in the United States. Low-earning students with affordable access to higher education have a far greater chance of entering the middle class, according to many studies.

School-wide drives like the 2020 Initiative, announced by Chancellor Linda Katehi in March 2013, have the potential to undermine UC Davis’ goal of becoming an even greater institution of social mobility. As part of a long-term growth model, the initiative has the important goal of increasing cultural diversity by recruiting more out-of-state and international students. UC Davis also stands to benefit from the higher tuition these students would pay.

But concerns have been raised about how the plan would affect in-state students.

From 2013 to 2015, the number of out-of-state first-years (including international students) admitted to UC Davis increased 57 percent while the number of in-state admits decreased by 12 percent. Fluctuations in admission and enrollment are complex. The in-state decrease should not be attributed to any one variable. But the result would be the same: a campus that caters more to those who can afford to pay higher tuition.

UC Davis needs to ensure that cultural and ethnic diversity will not come at the expense of economic diversity.

In its first-year implementation plan for the initiative, UC Davis acknowledged that without more revenue from out-of-state tuition, it might be compelled to reduce enrollment, with socioeconomic diversity suffering as a consequence.

It’s worth noting that this initiative was formed prior to the 2015 tuition standoff between UC Regents and the California government that threatened to make the UC system significantly less affordable. Now that an agreement to increase state funding to the UC has been reached, and tuition has been frozen, UC Davis should focus on making up its in-state admission losses.

The Editorial Board hopes that the UC Davis community pays attention to other potential barriers to an economically diverse student body.

In the past, rising tuition affected lower income students disproportionately compared to students with better means. According to the Department of Education, the net price paid by students with families at UC Davis earning $30,000 or less was $10,492 in the 2013 academic year, up $1,118 from two years earlier.

In that same period of time, families earning more than $110,000 saw their student’s tuition increase $1,845 despite having an income over three times as great as the lowest bracket.

This discrepancy proves the obvious, but perhaps overlooked, point that the poorest students suffer the brunt of tuition hikes more than anyone else. UC Davis needs to take this into account when tuition unfreezes.

But because net prices are prices paid after assistance like the Pell grant, UC Davis’ high standing on the New York Times list shows that the University has become a far more equitable institution with the help of state and federal aid. With 31 percent of students receiving the Pell grants at Davis—and comparable figures across the UC—this system continues to affirm its historic role as a provider of education to the masses.

UC Davis should congratulate itself for the accomplishment but also be aware that it stands at a crossroads and could lose what positive inroads it has made into social mobility.

Graphic by Jennifer Wu.

Every quarter, The California Aggie hires a new group of opinion columnists who write weekly pieces on a topic of their choosing. This Fall, our columnists represent a wide array of beliefs and concerns.

Jesús Olivares Guerrero, a senior communications and business double major, turns our attention to Europe. Recently, the continent has been the site of conflicts ranging from a refugee crisis to the instability of the Greek economy. Guerrero, an international student from Spain, offers pointed opinions on these matters, and critically examines institutions like the European Union to help identify problems and solutions. He writes with the Davis community in mind, hoping to bring what may be an overlooked continent into clear focus.

As Guerrero’s topic is driven by geography, Hayley Prokos’ is driven by age. A senior French and English double major, Prokos will write about Millennial culture. Generally defined as the generation born between the early 80’s and 00’s, Millennials are one of the largest demographics in the United States. But despite the population size, questions about this generation’s identity — including their preferences, priorities and composition— remain contentious. Prokos wants to analyze these questions, first by identifying what we know about Generation Y and then using these facts to create her own narrative.

Martha Greenburg, a junior communications major, focuses on one of the millennial generation’s trademark concerns: how to be a good consumer. Greenburg’s interest in how and why the products we buy affect our environment leads her to explore the concept of so-called ‘ethical consumerism’. Do we boycott goods produced by employees paid sub-par wages? How do we choose whether to buy meat at the supermarket or the farmer’s market? Greenburg has a particular mission to inform readers about which companies might best reflect their political, social and economic views. She will recount her own experience of becoming a more conscious spender in order to show others what steps they can make, and what mistakes they should avoid in changing their own consumption habits.

Similarly concerned about making important decisions, Jazmin Garcia will write about online dating and some of its intersection with one of her majors: psychology. With her other major, English, Garcia’s columns promise to be a unique exploration into one of the fastest growing modes of courtship. Her writing will focus in part on the stigma of online dating, which she will parse to see which myths hold up, and which don’t. A part of her concern about online intimacy comes exclusively from technology (she notes that since the 1870’s, two people need not be in the same room to carry a conversation), but she is careful to describe how culture, morality and simple compatibilty play into a potential relationship.

These columns were chosen with a careful consideration of their relevance to the Davis community. Prokos’ column on Millennials won’t just be geared toward an audience of twenty-somethings; she is also writing for Baby Boomers. Guerrero believes that European conflicts can provide a lesson to students right here.

These columnists find value in what you make of their work. If you would like to share a reaction to one of their pieces, you are more than welcome. Their UC Davis emails will be provided at the end of each column.

I hope you have as much pleasure reading their work as I will editing it.

You can reach Eli Flesch at ekflesch@ucdavis.edu.

Graphic designed by Jennifer Wu.