READERS WRITE

Politics in academia

Responses to “Professors don’t pull students to the left,” @issue, Nov. 10

Curricula at fault for academic woes

In her column, Maureen Downey misses the point. The issue is not whether students are being pulled left, right or otherwise but whether they are being taught what they need to know. And evidence shows they are not.

At institutions across the country, students can graduate without ever taking such subjects as Shakespeare, American political history or military history as professors abandon the teaching of more “traditional” fields in favor of other subjects.

The problem is not active indoctrination but the far more subtle damage that occurs when course offerings are driven by the varied interests and agendas of the faculty and not the intellectual needs of the students. Students cannot know what they are not taught. And that should have parents, students and taxpayers concerned.

ANNE D. NEAL

Neal is president of the American Council of Trustees and Alumni in Washington, D.C.

Professors’ politics improper in class

Citing studies, Maureen Downey’s column rebukes the notion that college professors have much influence on swaying the political opinion of their students. The issue is not whether professors “turn malleable students into…lefties.” Rather, the issue is why these professors are even conveying their liberal leanings, shutting down open discussion and in some cases punishing with lower grades students who hold conservative views.

I am acutely aware as an adjunct professor and parent of college students that many professors convey not subtly but blatantly their liberal slant. My graduate students told stories of constantly being subjected to the liberal views of their professors. Secondly, the issue is not whether teachers should honor all viewpoints but rather that students should not be punished, even subtly, if they have a different political view than their professors.

PATRICK SHAUL

Lawrenceville

Early voting

Our ‘instant gratification’ mentality

A reader opined that “early voting should be expanded” (@issue, Nov. 11). While there is a need for absentee balloting (for those who are traveling or sick) and mail-in balloting for those living abroad, predating an election one or two months ahead is a bad idea. In fact, early voting should be abolished. Early voting gives an unfair advantage to candidates who can raise an obscene amount of money, which can be used to manipulate early voting. When dramatic events take place or new facts about a candidate emerge, you cannot recall your vote.

We Americans have the mentality of instant gratification and seek comfort and convenience. We want to mail in the vote rather than stand in line. Democracy is not intended to be comfortable; it is a serious matter and involves some effort on the part of voters.

RAMAKRISHN RAMAN, Tucker

Leave the ballot rules alone

As one of those who helped craft Georgia’s no-excuse absentee ballot law (“early voting”), I would note that the current proposals to limit or curtail early voting are misguided and wrong. The truth is that the justification for changing the early voting rules stems from its enormous success. That makes no sense —- because everyone liked it and used it, change it? Every action should be taken to make voting easier, not more difficult. Republicans wanting to change the rules would be taking a step in the wrong direction.

RANDY EVANS

Evans is general counsel of the Georgia Republican Party and a member of the State Election Board.

Alternative energy expensive, limited

Gus Cochran says liberals enthusiastically support President-elect Barack Obama’s plan to explore alternative energy sources (“Dear Obama: Don’t go right; get it right,” @issue, Nov 10). That’s what the Department of Energy has been doing for more than 30 years, to the tune of many billions of dollars. Solar energy provides almost 1 percent of America’s electricity.

The problem is that energy suppliers such as Georgia Power understand the laws of thermodynamics, which is the science concerned with the relationship between heat and mechanical energy or work (usable energy).

An important law is that the efficiency of a usable energy generator is approximately equal to the difference in temperatures of the energy source and ambient temperature at the point of use. The temperature of solar and geothermal energy is about 10,000 degrees at the surface of the sun and in the middle of the Earth, and near ambient temperature on the Earth’s surface.

Alternative energy such as solar, geothermal, wind and tidal will always be expensive and of limited availability.

CLINTON BASTIN

Avondale Estates

Bush deserved a call for unity

After reading recent letters to the editor, I am again dismayed at the liberals’ self-serving point of view. These letters talked about how, for Obama to succeed, we must unite as a team. How come this wasn’t the Democrats’ plea when George Bush was in office?

Negative comments about Bush have gone as far back as Day One. After 9/11, some Democrats actually accused Bush of knowing about it beforehand and letting it happen. The “support” that many Democrats showed for Bush at that time was by applauding those who were “taking a stand” and “having the courage to speak up,” rather than by dismissing those attacks and calling for American unity. That was just the beginning of eight long years of non-stop criticism.

In response to the “call-to-unity” rhetoric, there is one promise I can make: I will support and respect our new president as much as the Democrats have so fervently supported and respected our current one.

BOB KEELER

Alpharetta