As engaged members of the scientific community, we must urge
our academic institutions to take action. Universities should lobby
elected officials, make public statements, and amplify graduate student
organization efforts. If the repeal of 117(d) passes into law, our top priority will then be reworking tuition schemes
to protect graduate student research and teaching. However, while the
tax bill is still in committee, we have a more pressing goal: to
unequivocally oppose the repeal of 117(d). We can call our elected
representatives [some of whom seem open to the change] to voice opposition, sign petitions, and advocate for safeguarding graduate studies. This
legislation will devastate productivity and innovation in higher
education. As a scientific community, it is our duty to embolden young
people to think and create. We can never recuperate the costs of lost
potential.
There is no description of the strategic risk to the country, to the impact of foreign students who will be supported by tax dollars etc. These are just a bunch of millennials whose argument is that as "engaged members" to have the University urge Congress. No reasons why other than they "feel" it should be so.
Where did logic go, rhetoric, or even basic grammar. We need a return of the Trivium, not the self serving sniffles of children whose view of the world is as an entity that owes them something. By the way, Congress did get to recognize that Yamamoto did go to Harvard and did send his forces to Pearl Harbor! That my young millennials is why we need to have more citizens partake productively of our tax payer funded Universities, despite their abusive overhead, due to prior Government mandates.
Posts
