Page 2/The Battalion/Friday, March 8,1985
v,;:> V.....:.. ..v:: ■.:v:.-.....^..^v:'J.^ : :^a;.. i^, .. - ^.±.:.v.'.
Corps hazing still
problem at A&.IVI
Another Texas A&M cadet has been suspended from the
University for requiring a fellow student to perform unautho
rized physical exercises.
Joseph Andrew Gassman, 20, is appealing the charge that he
forced another cadet — who has since withdrawn from the Uni
versity — to perform “motivational exercises,” exercises which
violate new regulations governing the Corps’ physical training.
It is upsetting and frightening that some members of the
Corps are continuing their long tradition of hazing, even after
the death of a fellow cadet last year.
It is encouraging that the University is finally taking action
against such physical and emotional mistreatment, instead of
turning its back. But why is action even having to be taken?
One cadet has died within the last year as a result of hazing.
We had hoped that Corps members would learn their lesson af
ter Bruce Goodrich’s death and would work to prevent further
tragedies. What is it going to take to end this terrible tradition?
The Battalion Editorial Board
IN COLLEGE'
roR
SPRING BREAK?
-DOMT MIS5* thf fum ...
, ^
*5CALE THCTkBmKOUS
HEIGHTS OF KYLE'S
2>RV DECK!
HE m THE SUMUy
conroRT of vour. cats
— UTTER DOX
idwin J. Feul
“Free Enterpris<
for his powerful
oolicy and cont
Quality of higher education depends on competition
[excessive govern
■Dr. Steve Pc
Texas A&M’s C
and Research i
said Feulner wil
efjt of what is to
T Pejovich said
been successful
policy by havin
specific p
ions to Preside n
epted as policy.
Jeulner also 1
reducing many j
ments and cna
policy.
■Since 1977,
[president of the
don, a public-pi
tute.
| The foundati
market, strong <
_ government.
I As the founda
has provided Pr<
?the ‘ Mandate foi
he 1,000-paj
thods for ea
Texa
State appro
priations to public
universities in
Texas are ex-
pected to decline
in the years to
come. It means
that top university
administrators will
Reader’s Forum
Reader’s Forum
Reader’s Forum
have to face a dif
ficult problem of
choosing what,
how and where to cut their budgets. In
making those choices it is only natural
for top university leaders to seek to min
imize political upheavals on campuses,
interdepartmental conflicts and peer
pressures. That is, they have strong in
centives to emphasize short-run solu
tions to their financial problems. The
important point is, however, that differ
ent budgetary choices have different
long-run effects on the quality of higher
education.
A number of budgetary alternatives
for coping with the forthcoming finan
cial crisis is being discussed by legis
lators, university administrators and
other interested citizens. I want to call
attention to two alternatives which are
mentioned with increasing frequency as
viable methods for making budgetary
adjustments in Texas public universi
ties: (1) across the board budget cuts
and (2) the elimination of duplicate pro
grams.
Traditionally, university administra
tors like to use across the board budget
cuts to resolve financial difficulties. This
method of budgetary adjustments shifts
the blame for financial problems from
the university leadership to state legis
lators. It also minimizes internal infight
ing and save top administrators from
having to make discretionary (unplea
sant) choices.
The effects of across the board bud
get cuts are easy to assess. First, it re
duces, via smaller total budget, the
overall quality of academic programs.
Second, across the board budget cuts
penalize cost-effective departments
while rewarding those that have been
able to build some fat into their budgets.
Most importantly, university adminis
trators who use across the board budget
cuts would have failed to perceive that
their current financial problems have
given them a unique opportunity and a
good excuse to re-examine academic
priorities in their universities. Across
the board budget cuts underwrite old
priorities, approve past compromises
and enhance the prevailing power struc
ture.
The idea of eliminating duplication
of programs in public universities has
been gaining support among top uni
versity leaders and state legislators. The
issue is quite simple: Should A&M pur
sue research that is also being done at
UT? Should UDT offer a program that
is being offered by Texas Tech? Should
TWU and NTSU be two schools with
two administrations? We are told that by
eliminating duplication of programs we
could reduce waste, inefficiencies and
redundancies in our schools. Higher ed
ucation could emerge from the current
financial crisis leaner, cost-efficient and
academically unscratched.
The issue involved in duplication of
programs might be simple, but real an
swers are not. There is a definitional
problem: what is duplication? Should
we have one, two or ten departments of
economics in Texas? Should research in
hydrogen energy be done at A&M or
UT or both? Is it duplication if the same
research is also done at Texas Tech? If
so, why so; if not, why not? To define
the limits of duplication is quite elusive
and arbitrary. Moreover, who is to de
cide which university loses what pro
grams? To go this route in resolving our
current financial problems would shift
the decision-making power in academic
affairs toward various layers of bu
reaucracy and “appointed” committees.
Definitional problems aside, the idea
of eliminating program duplication is
conceptionally frightening. Why? What
we refer to as duplication of programs is
called competition in the private sector.
To seek to eliminate competition is a vi
olation of anti-trust laws. And for a
good reason. Government protected
monopolies end up charging the public
more money for fewer goods and serv
ices.
Compared to monopoly, competition
is not always a pleasant experience. The
manager of a competitive firm is more
likely to have sleepless nights, heart
problems, ulcers and nervous break
downs than his counterpart in a monop
oly situation. On the other hand, com
petition forces people to excel, to be
alert to opportunities, to keep promises
and to seek innovative investments.
Most importantly, two survival criteria
in a competitive environment are the
ability to (1) out-guess competition
about what other people want, and (2)
satisfy those wants at the lowest cost.
Competition is then a strict disciplina
rian which channels our energies and
abilities in the direction of providing
only those services that are in demand.
Why is the idea of eliminating compe
tition in academic programs and re
search pursuits gaining support? It is
even supported by a number of people
who approve of anti-trust laws. The an
swer is quite simple. It is asserted that
By TAM
Stafi
\s you drive
jtxas during
the effects of competition in the pm
sector are different (and more desi
hie) from those in the public sector,
word assert is used purposely here,
not know of any study that has dei
strated, at an acceptable level of sc might find the 1
arship, that competition (duplicatior : ont * ; co y er ed tht
the public sector is less desirable thac» n ^ us ^
the private sector. In fact, William!\»p ormore t j ian
kanen who is currently serving on Pt jHi^hway Depar
dent Reagan’s Council of Economic mmed in 24 T
visors, Jim Buchanan, Robert ToE planting of
and many other economists haveshoi
that duplication of services in thepi
sector provides the community «
benefits which are similar to those!
competition in the private sector. Dup
cation of programs reduces the cosii
quality control. It also reduces theti
of monitoring teaching and research!!
ficiency. As long as other scholars i
applying and doing the same resean
that I am interested in I will feel
greater pressure to produce a high!)®
ity output at a lower research cost
some of the highi
are to eliminate program duplicatons
public universities the effects of ouri]
cision on the quality and costofhigl
education will be quite similar to
of eliminating competition in theoili]
dustry.
Steve Pejovich is a professor of
nomics and the director of the Cent
for Free Enterprise at Texas A&M,
CBS anchorman needed,
no experience necessary
By ART BUCHWALD
Columnist for The Los Angeles Times Syndicate
Three well-dressed gentlemen came
in to see me the other day.
One of them said, “We’re from the
‘Jesse Helms Committee to Fire Dan
Rather’ and we’re interviewing people
to replace Rather on the ‘CBS Evening
News.’”
“Has Dan been fired already?” I
asked.
“It’s just a matter of time until we
have enough stock to get control of the
company. Your name was given to use
as a staunch conservative who believes
in the American way of life, and some
one who won’t sell out his country.
I blushed, “That’s a fair description
of myself.”
“How do you feel about Dan Rather?”
“I’d like to tear the sweater off his
back.”
One of the gentlemen smiled. “We
were hoping you would say that. The
anchorman we’re looking for is some
one who will report the news without
f jrejudice, while at the same time high-
ight the conservative side of the story.”
“That’s no problem,” I said. “If you
can’t give the conservative point of view
on the evening news, you don’t have the
right to call yourself a journalist.”
“How do you feel about secular hu
manism?” one of the gentlemen asked
me.
“I don’t think people should engage
in it until they’re married,” I said. “I
wouldn’t put a secular humanist story
on the air because I know a lot of kids
are watching.”
This seemed to please all three.
One of them said, “Suppose a woman
was raped and wanted an abortion. How
would you treat that story?”
“I’d interview Sen. Helms and let him
tell me why she was wrong.”
“How do you stand on the church
and state issue?”
“I don’t believe in the separation of
church and state. If I got Dan Rather’s
job I would start off my show with a
prayer every night. No one has the right
to keep God off the evening news.”
I could tell they were getting very in
terested in me.
“Are you for an arms agreement with
the Soviets?”
“I am certainly not. And I wouldn’t
hesitate to read from the Bible where it
says you can’t make a deal with the Rus
sians.”
“How would you treat the apartheid
problem in Soutn Africa?”
“I believe an anchorman must pre
sent both sides of the story. If I had a
film showing the South African police
killing blacks, I would also make sure
and put on Premier Botha to explain
why he had to do it.”
“Suppose an official of the Reagan
administration admits to beating his
wife? Would you report it?”
“I don’t consider that news. That’s
the typical kind of character assassina
tion that the American people are fed
up with. A responsible journalist should
only report the good things about the
government and not the bad.”
“You’re certainly a breath of fresh
air,” one of the men said. “A final ques
tion. How do you feel about cigarette
smoking causing cancer?”
“Why do you ask?”
“Jesse Helms represents the tobacco
interests, and I don’t think he’d appre
ciate it if you ran any stories that would
show cigarette smoking in a bad light.”
“Tell the senator he won’t ever see
the Surgeon General of the United
States on his network.”
“That’s good enough for us. As soon
as we get control of CBS we’ll be in
touch with you.”
“You won’t be sorry,” I assured them.
“I can’t wait to see the look on Dan
Rather’s face when I walk into the stu
dio and make him yell ‘uncle!’”
LETTERS:
Bait staff praised for
professional quality
EDITOR:
I became a member of the staff at
Texas A&M six months ago after mov
ing here from another state. (Yes, I’m
one of those Yankees.) Shortly after
starting work, I was introduced to The
Battalion. I have had the opportunity to
read other college papers and was clo
sely associated with the staff of one pa
per in particular. Through this associa
tion I learned what goes on “behind the
scene” and how much time and energy
is required just getting the paper to the
press. A great cleal of cooperation and
team work is a must if any degree of
quality is to be attained.
The staff at The Battalion deserve
tremendous praise for their efforts. To
produce a daily paper of such profes
sional quality at a college level is highly
commendable. Congratulations to all of
you!
I suggest that anyone who feels this
paper is less than adequate should first
compare it to other college publications
before throwing stones.
Lila Tyler
Cadets’ Big Event
work appreciated
EDITOR:
As a member of the Married Student
Apartment Council, I’d like to thank the
2o volunteers form Squadron 1 of the
Corps for committing five hours of their
time to the Married Student Apart
ments during the Big Event.
The group worked on four projects
simultaneously to create a job “well do
ne.” About half of the crew devoted two
hours to picking up dangerous con
struction scraps at an apartment-reno
vation site, across the street from
Skaggs. The other half sealed the leak
ing roof of our garage and meeting
room with caulking and a roof sealant.
After this was completed, some workers
put a suspended ceiling in the meeting
room while others transported about
30,200 pounds of concrete parking
blocks to a playground area.
On behalf of the Married Student
Apartment Council and the residents, I
sincerely thank the Squadron 1 cadets
for the time, effort, and good attitude
put forth on Saturday, March 2.
John Downs, ’83
People must never
forget Holocaust
EDITOR:
Racial hate is an ugly thing, which is
why it tends to express itself anony
mously. So it is that tracts from the “Na
tional Vanguard” are appearing on
campus, tacked furtively on bulletin
boards or inserted into other publica
tions in the MSC. Whatever name it
masquerades under, the lies spread in
the name of white supremacy and anti
semitism haven’t changed. We distrust
that few at A&M are sympathetic to calls
for a racial war, or the purge of all those
who are somehow “different” from our
selves. We should not forget what the
consequences of racial hatred have
been, both in this country and else
where. It is for this reason that organi
zations such as “National Vanguard 9, are
so eager to deny the reality of the Holo
caust, the wholesale slaughter of six mil
lion Jews and millions of other “undesi
rables” under Nazi Germany. These
would-be perpetrators of a new “Final
Solution” would conceal the implica
tions of their philosophy of hatred. Our
best defense is to learn the lessons of
history, and especially the Holocaust,
and to strive continuously for a world
where we can live in peace with all our
fellow men and women. Any other re
sponse would render the sacrifice of the
Holocaust victims yet more tragic.
Alex Madonik
accompanied by 15 signatures
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Brigtd Brockman, Editor
Shelley Hoekstra, Managing Editor
Ed Cassavoy, City Editor
Kellie Dworaczyk, News Editor
Michelle Powe, Editorial Page Editor
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
The Battalion Staff
Assistant City Editors
Kari Fluegel, Rhonda Snider
Assistant News Editors
Cami Brown, John Hallett, Kay Mallei!
Assistant Sports Editor
Charean Williams
Entertainment Editors
Shawn Behlen, Leigh-EIlen Clark
Staff Writers Cathie Anderson,
Brandon Berry, Dainah Bullard,
Ann Cervenka, Michael Crawford,
Kirsten Dietz, Patti Flint
Patrice Koranek, Trent Leopold,
Sarah Oates, Jerry Oslin,
Tricia Parker, Lynn Rae Povec
Copy Editors .Jan Perry, Kelley Smidi
Make-up Editors Karen Bloch,
Karla Martin
Columnists Ed Cassavoy, Kevin Inda,
Loren Steff)
Editorial Cartoonist Mike Lane
Sports Cartoonist Dale Smith
Copy Writer Cathy Bennett
Photo Editor Katherine Hurl
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-proTit, self-supporting newspapti
operated as a community service to Texas A&M a«l
Bryan-CoUege Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of lk
Editorial Board or the author, and do not necessarily rep
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, /acufe
or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper lot
students in reporting, editing and photograph) classe
within the Department of Communications.
Letters Policy
Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in
length. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters
for style and length hut will make every effort to maintain
the author's intent. Each letter must oe signed and must
include the address and telephone number of the writer.
The Battalion is publisned Monday through Frida)
during Texas A&M regular semesters, except forholida)
and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are $16.7^
per semester, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full
year. Advertising rates furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald
Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, T\
77843. Editorial staff phone number: (409) 845-2630, Ad
vertising: (409) 845-2o 11.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843
POSTMAS1ER: Send address changes to The Battal
ion, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
77843