In early September, the University announced its plans to construct a new building on what is currently the lawn just South and West of Maginnes. Dubbed the STEPS (Science, Technology, Environment, Policy, and Society) Initiative, this building is intended to augment the facilities currently in use by the College of Arts and Sciences.

As it stands, the College of Arts and Sciences has recently expanded to include two new buildings. The Smith Family Center for Optical Technologies was opened in 2005 and another facility for research in the biosciences was built in 2003. This throws into sharp contrast the facilities enjoyed by the P. C. Rossin College of Engineering and Applied Science. In particular, research in some of the most rapidly changing engineering fields (Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and Mechanical Engineering) is located in the one of the oldest academic buildings on campus (Packard Lab).

According to Dork Sahagian, a professor of Earth and Environmental Sciences and Director of the Environmental Initiative, “enabling multidisciplinary research and teaching is the main driving force behind [the project].” He claims that, “by housing all the Chemistry, Biology, and Earth and Environmental Sciences teaching labs there, it will bring in students from many disciplines.”

In addition, Dr. Sahagian expects that the $85 million dollar colossus will help students “improve their understanding and awareness of the environment.”

Lehigh is an engineering college and always has been, though the 1995 mascot change from “engineer” to the fictitious bird dubbed the “mountain hawk” might fool the casual observer. As such, the University should be concerned first and foremost with the Engineering College. Without doubt, the biological, chemical, earth, and environmental sciences are an important component of certain engineering disciplines, but it is with their relevance to engineering in mind that we should consider additions to our campus.

Interdisciplinary work is of paramount importance of making engineering advances relevant to the world as a whole; however, the way in which the STEPS initiative intends to do so is, more or less, backwards. President Alice Gast states that “this new program will allow collaborative teams of engineers and natural and social scientists to work easily together across disciplinary boundaries,” providing a framework within which “scientists, engineers, and social scientists can debate and help shape environmental policy in productive and constructive ways.”

Between President Gast and Dr. Sahagian, it seems as if this project intends to infuse the engineering paradigm (that has been the college’s focus since its 1865 founding) with a smattering of the liberal arts. Viewed in the context of the other recent changes around Lehigh in both policy and practice, this is a frightening possibility.

Interdisciplinary efforts are a noble goal; however, the University seems to have ignored the largest potential for such interaction in their plans. The three most rapidly changing fields in the Engineering College, and possibly in the University as a whole, are (in no particular order) Materials Science and Engineering, Electrical Engineering and Computer Science, and Mechanical Engineering. The extent to which these departments could benefit from increased interdisciplinary research is mind-boggling. Focusing on certain departments from the Arts and Sciences College seems to be an indication that the Engineering College has, once again, been “left out.”

In addition to the purely political issues with the STEPS Initiative, the building itself poses problems. It will be situated on one of the last flat, treeless fields on campus. This makes it a perfect field for playing Frisbee, provided a building doesn’t cover a large portion of it. The architects intended to ease this problem by putting grass on top of part of the building, but (as those of us familiar with the movie Clerks can attest) the roof of a building is a far-from-optimal location on which to play sports.

The STEPS building will also be the second of two buildings constructed in the same area of South Bethlehem. Currently, the replacement Broughal Middle School is still being framed on the corner of West Morton and Vine Streets. The $48 million, 186,600 square-foot project is set to be completed in August of 2009. Groundbreaking for the STEPS project is set for late spring 2008, with completion expected in June 2010. This means that, for at least a year, construction will be occurring in adjacent sites between Brodhead, Campus Square, and Packard Lab.

This project is a large investment that will change the face of Lehigh’s campus. The University has set forth noble goals, as outlined by President Gast and Dr. Sahagian. However, these initiatives are not as beneficial to the Engineering College, even to the University as a whole, as other investments promise to be. There are several examples where various departments in the P. C. Rossin College of Engineering and Applied Science could do with a little extra funding, especially when this building marks the third in a recent string of new facilities for the traditionally secondary College of Arts and Sciences.

Never file another federal tax return, eliminate the Internal Revenue Service, and abolish the sixteenth amendment. Are these radical ideas merely wishful thinking? Not for the supporters of a national FairTax, in which the federal government earns its revenue through a one-time tax on all retail goods and services. In fact, a few presidential hopefuls have campaigned with the implementation of a FairTax as one of their key platforms, most notably Mike Huckabee. With this idea gaining momentum in the 2008 presidential election, it may be useful to examine exactly how such a change in federal taxation would impact our country.

The key behind FairTax is that it would radically simplify the tax system. It would replace the over 30,000 pages of IRS tax code with the mere 136 pages of HR-25 and S-1025, the proposed bills that outline FairTax. FairTax begins by abolishing the sixteenth amendment, in turn eliminating the IRS and the need to file personal federal tax returns. With FairTax, the federal government would no longer tax personal or corporate earnings. Instead, it would require a percentage tax on all retail goods and services sold for personal consumption, similar to state sales tax.

Extensive research has determined that a tax of 23% on all retail goods and services is necessary to match current revenues, but it is important to clarify that number. Represented inclusively, the tax is calculated by using the price paid to the retailer, $1.30 for instance, then remitting 23% of that price, $0.30, to the government. Represented exclusively, the FairTax is equal to 30% of the pre-tax price.

Whatever way it is represented, federal taxation begins and ends there: no more employer withholding of income taxes, no more filing yearly tax returns, and no more taxation on businesses. Intermediaries are not taxed, only the final user. The reason is simple: the cost of taxation on business-to-business transactions is often passed indirectly to the consumer in the final price of a product or service, resulting in a sort of “hidden tax.” Fewer taxes on businesses would allow them to pass the savings on to the consumer.

The idea is that consumers ultimately gain purchasing power by being able to keep every penny they earn and through the elimination of hidden taxes. The only federal tax would be plainly visible, not obfuscated by the complexity of the current graduated income tax system. Furthermore, FairTax would do away with the egregious costs involved in maintaining compliance with the current tax code. In fact, individuals would no longer have to file tax returns. Instead, that responsibility is placed solely on retailers. It is estimated that the complicated nature of the current tax system consumes a total of 6 billion hours and costs taxpayers over $265 billion for filing, record keeping, and reduction advice.

FairTax not only makes compliance easier, but also makes evasion harder. By treating all taxpayers equally, it closes loopholes afflicting the current system. Even more compelling is the fact that the underground economy would now have no choice but to contribute to federal taxation. Legal wage-earners, drug dealers, illegal immigrants, and everyone else would end up paying the FairTax as their money returns to the economy at retail purchase points, thus augmenting the overall tax base.

Projections indicate that the implementation of a FairTax would result in tax revenue equal to that currently achieved under the IRS. A legitimate argument is that a standard tax rate on all retail goods and services could be severely detrimental to the lower class, which spends a proportionally larger amount of their earnings on necessities. For that reason, FairTax contains a provision to offer a monthly “prebate” in the form of a check mailed from the government to households below the poverty line. The payment returns to that household the amount of taxation it will be paying to the government in the subsequent month, up to the poverty line. Essentially, the FairTax plan completely eliminates all federal taxes being levied on the poorest of Americans, perhaps distributing the tax burden more equitably.

Furthermore, by shifting the tax burden from an individual’s production to consumption, FairTax provides an incentive for Americans to save, rather than spend, their earnings. No form of individual or corporate earnings would be subject to tax, including capital gains. As such, FairTax considers the cost of a college education to be an investment and thus does not levy any taxes against it. Such a stimulus to save may be highly appropriate for an economy plagued with debt.

Perhaps the FairTax system is worth considering. It would begin by abolishing the sixteenth amendment and eliminating the IRS. Federal taxation would consist solely of a 23% tax levied on all goods and services at the retail level. It is revenue-neutral, while simultaneously exempting households below the poverty line from the burden of taxation. The simplicity of this plan could drastically reduce the amount of time and money Americans spend on tax compliance. It would also mitigate the problems of tax evasion through an underground economy. By moving the burden of taxation from production to consumption, FairTax could usher in a much-needed change to our federal tax system.