I find it necessary to respectfully respond in simple disagreement to Stacy S. Skelly’s Letter to the Editor on June 17. It is simply not true, and certainly not “clear,” that “textbook publishers’ primary focus is on meeting the educational needs of students and faculty.”

This is not a slight against them but is a justifiable reality of the capitalist society we live in. Their business is in selling books, as Nike’s is in selling shoes and Apple’s is in selling computers. If Nike were to tell its shareholders, “Our primary focus is not on profit,” there would be no Nike. I don’t write this now to denigrate their responsibilities as a business. I write this only to clarify ours as a student service organization.

Skelly insists that publishers work regularly with faculty concerning textbook options and prices and that it is the faculty who select textbooks and supplementary materials.

Such may be the case in a small number of incidences, but in no way is this happening “regularly” or effectively. Publishers have been so mindless to the “educational needs of students and faculty” that the U.S. Congress has taken the issue into its own hands, passing HR 4137 overwhelmingly, 354-58, in the House of Representatives.

This bill requires publishers to both disclose textbook prices to the faculty and to unbundle any supplemental materials.

It is obviously harder for students to “succeed” if they are having to work more hours or are picking up more loans just to pay for textbooks. If anyone shares “the common goal of helping students succeed,” it is currently, and surprisingly, Congress.

Bryce AddisonSG Director of Academics