Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Feb. 5, 1975)
Page 2 THE BATTALION WEDNESDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1975 S mile Kissinger watches over all By MIKE PERRIN Good old Hank Kissinger is at it again. But don’t blame him; he’s just another government employee. Kissinger and the government are proposing a program of “relief for America’s consumers, hard- pressed by the so-called energy crisis. The problem is that prices are too high, right? So what we need is some government action, right? Well, now the government has acted. They are proposing a minimum price for imported oil. That’s right — a minimum. Even if the Arabs wished to lower the price below this minimum, the U.S. gov ernment would not buy it for less. Or let you buy it for less. That’s government for you. Their problem, as pointed out again and again in this column, is that they can do nothing to solve problems, so they must try to spread the misery of problems around as much as pos sible. How does this minimum price work? Well, the price of oil will be set at $7 or $9 per barrel minimum. The current price is about $11. In 1973, it was $3. So the minimum is two and one half or three times higher than the old price. And what is the dark and tortured reasoning in this proposal to “help Americans? Well, the explanation goes, alternate energy sources cost about $7 to $9 per barrel, measured in comparable units to petroleum. This alternate energy is economi cally feasible, then, whenever the price of oil is $7 to $9 per barrel or higher. Or in other words, oil is cheaper to use if it is below $7 to $9 per barrel. The idea the govern ment has is to make alternative energy sources used, not to make them cheaper. This, they reason, lessens our “dependence” on im ported oil. After all, there is always the danger that they might try to raise the price of oil again, right? Well, the fact is that oil prices are about to come down anyway, be cause some nations, like Venezuela, hurt more than others, like Saudi Arabia, from decreased petroleum sales — they have more population and have ongoing programs to fund ; But the muddled political mind ignores these facts of life and of economics — people are best off when their incomes are at a max imum; plus the government cannot increase incomes, they can only de crease incomes. Income decreases anytime prices or taxes go up. Government can increase taxes and therefore raise prices, but they cannot lower prices at all. They covdd leave off all the taxes they put on in the first place and the base price of a good would still be the same amount. If government tries to legislate the prices so that they decline, the amount available of the product declines or disappears. Remember the 1970 wage and price controls which resulted in so many shortages? Shortages mean a de cline in income because less is avail able to buy. So governments cannot cut prices. The Arab governments levied taxes on oil a year ago. Their prices went up because of the tax. If those governments had not existed, then the prices could not have been raised by taxes. The Lbiited States, of course, saw this taxation by the Arabs as being anti-American, and therefore re sponded by increasing the taxes on oil. (In case you think that this is the same thing as raising Americans’ prices, you are right.) Well, after putting the increased tax on the Arab oil, the government was pretty well satisfied. “That’ll show ’em!” (Who? The Arabs don’t pay any more for their gasoline.) More leisure time meant more time to listen to lobbyists, and soon, lob byists came. Lobbying for American so that at the end of the year we have contributed more to the world than prosperity and “independence”, they proposed making oil expensive enough so that their clients, who were “into funky energy” could be assured of sales and even govern ment grants to help them turn a buck. (“Funky energy” includes solar and wind power; these are supposed to be non-polluting, therefore “funky”.) Thus, Kissinger disguises price fixing for alternate energy sources in a price floor for oil and calls it inde pendence. The freedom to pay un necessarily high prices for the energy we use. So what if we spend $30 billion a year for imported oil? So what? That’s about 3 percent of the Gross National Product. Last year, we sold about $40 billion worth of machine tools overseas. Is this economic piracy? Or is it just good business? them against you in the market place. This is paranoia. When it in volves billions of dollars and mill ions of people, it is no longer paranoia, but politics. All that deficit means is that the outside world gave us more things of value last year than we gave them. So we had to make up the difference in money, which is only a claim against future services. So instead of wasting our time rigging things so that we can waste more of our time developing alter nate energy sources, we should be doing the things we do best - i - heavy tool manufacturing and food growing and selling those products we have taken from it. In other words, we would then have a surp lus. But there is no room in all this for government. Government knows this, so they must divert our atten tion away from the things we need to do onto the things which will give the bureaucrats and politicians an excuse for collecting their paychecks. Mr. Kissinger should grow up. Instead of taking Nobel peace prizes for phony peaces and proposing programs to hurt American con sumers by freezing prices at a higher level than they have to be, he should do something useful. Like fingering his navel. At least them, he’d keep out of trouble. Other people worry about the balance of payments “problem.” This problem is non-existent, but is very useful for politicians to rant and rave about. The balance of pay ments “problem” is hardly worth wasting breath on. For example, Texas last year collected a great deal t>f money from a lot of states like New Mexico, Arizona, and Neb raska for petroleum products. Yet no one is worried about that balance of payments “problem”. Texans in turn, paid a great deal of money to Michigan for automobiles; how about that balance of payments “problem”? Bryan residents paid a lot of money to Beaumont-Port Ar thur for refined gasoline. How about that problem? The balance of payments is a number. Politics turned it into a problem. flpie veggie fdram ^ Building Use Fees due Increases What if Saudi Arabia and all the rest of those oil states were state Number 51 over here? There would be no fuss. The whole point is this — a surplus in the balance of payments means that a country sells more than it buys from others. A deficit means that it buys more than it sells. You have a personal balance of payments problem with the grocery store and the gas station and the telephone company. In every case, you buy more than you sell to those entities. Is this seen as a problem to be coped with by growing and processing your own food, refining your own gasoline, and stringing a wire and tin can to all your friends’ houses so that your balance of payments “problem” is cured? Of course you don’t. It would be a waste of your time, unless you sim ply had nothing better to do than hoe weeds, slop pigs, drill oil, and; String wire. You have a more impor tant contribution to make. You don’t see this as a problem because you receive value for your dollars. You don’t worry that over the long run, the phone company might save up all the dollars you give them to use By CURT MARSH VP for Finance Student Government A&M has historically been considered an institution where a not so wealthy school boy could go to get a college degree. Not only was A&M inexpensive but it provided an education that was well re spected in many areas. Now the fees have gone up in all areas. Most dramatic was the Building Use Fee which increased from $2 to $6 per semester hour effective this semes ter. “Why did this happen?” students ask. He is told that it is to pay for bond on the new Ag buildings to be built across the tracks. What bothers most of us is that we may never even see these buildings in use until well after we graduate. One may rationalize that we have been getting a free ride so far since most of the buildings on campus have been paid for. The collection plate is now passed by us to sub sidize future students’ classroom facilities. Yet this explanation doesn’t satisfy me, nor are most other students satisfied by it. The answer to the increase in the Building Use Fee goes beyond the new buildings across the tracks. It even goes beyond “the Wall . The answer lies in the logic that has be come so pervasive in higher educa tion. The logic is that the bigger you are, the better you are. Not because the student you turn out is necessar ily any better. Which may or may not be true. But because it is considered self evident that a uni versity of 30 or 40 thousand is better than a university of 10 or 15 thousand. It is interesting to note that the private universities that are considered among best in education have enrollments of around 7 to 8 thousand or less. State supported institutions on the other hand, pur- \ to Directors’ irresponsivenes sue their quest lor greatness by in creasing enrollment. It is not unre lated that this is also how they get more money from the state. By growth analysis, A&M is obviously the best university in the nation since its enrollment increase has not only been the highest anywhere, but it has been in the top three for the last several years. To continue to grow we must keep building, and to keep building we must have more money. A&M’s primary source of revenue for build ings is the Available University Fund which is one-third of the in terest earned from the Permanent University Fund. It can be spent directly or it can be pledged to pay for Permanent University Fund bonds. As of July 19, 1974, our Board of Directors had issued bonds pledging future Permanent Univer sity Fund revenues up to the legal limit. The bond issued at that time was {br$f),()()0,0()p. Any subsequent bonds must be termed Revenue Bonds which are paid for from some other source of income. At the Board Meeting of Sept. 10, 1974, a Revenue Bond for $25,000,000 was approved, “to pro vide funds for the improvement of existing facilities, and the construc tion and equipment of buildings, structures and facilities on the cam pus of Texas A&M University. ” This bond is to be paid for by the $4 per hour increase in Building Use Fee. The problem that concerns most student leaders is that students have virtually no control over the action of the Board. The Board is under no compulsion to listen to the students. It seems at times that students are only good as a source of revenue, not as the object of the institution. The state itself does not even have any control on the amount of bonds issued by institutions of higher education. The Texas Stu dents Assoc, requested information from all colleges and universities in Texas asking for information on their amount of debtedness. The grand total was well over $500,000,000. Texas A&M alone has at least $98,000,000 in debt out standing. Legislation is now being written to start placing restraints on in creases in Building Use Fees. One such piece of legislature is to amend Section 56.16 of the Texas Educa tion Code. This would in effect set a limit of $6 per semester hour that can be charged students for Build- Slouch Jim Earle Cbe Battalion Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editor or of the writer of the article and are not necessarily those of the university administration or the Board of Directors. The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting enterprise operated by students as a university and community newspaper. Editorial policy is determined by the editor. MEMBER The Associated Press, Texas Press Association The Battalion, a student newspaper at Texas A&M, is published in College Station, Texas, daily except Saturday, Sunday, Monday, and holiday periods, September through Klay, and once a week during summer school. LETTERS POUCY Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words and are subject to being cut to that length or less if longer. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit such letters and does not guaran tee to publish any letter. Each letter must be signed, show the address of the writer and list a telephone number for verifica tion. Mail subscriptions are $5.00 per semester; $9.50 per school vear; S10.50 per full year. All subscriptions subject to 5Si sales tax. Advertising rate furnished^ on request. Address: The Battalion, Room 217! Services Building. College' Station, Texas 77843. The Associated Press is entitled exclusively to the use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it or not otherwise credited in the paper and local news of spontaneous origin published herein. Right of reproduction of all other matter herein are also reserved. Second-Class postage paid at College Station, Texas. ing Use Fees. Unfortunatelv : couldn't help us now with ourpif ent situation. Several steps must be till I-.,. , beyond this one piece of legislai if a long range solution forthef f ! dents’ problem is to be solved: I • There must he atleastonesl E dent appointed to the Boardofil rectors. This is the cent I decision-making body that affects | as students. A student on theBm I could communicate and repres I the desires of the student W) | • A limitation placed on thele ) of indebtedness an agency off f state can commit itself to, I would limit an institution fe | over-building. The post WorP | II baby boom generation is pasts | enrollment can not continuetoi I crease as it has in the recentpst | • A limit on enrollment Cc I rently, we let nearly everybody and then if they can’t find aplacf live, they must go somewhereeb Housing facilities in this area are«; only real limit on enrollment-!* jj our classroom capacity. It is my opinion that we must rs ; the standards of admission tob 1 down enrollment increases. 1 b' asked administrators many tiiJf t why we can’t do this and theans*' I am given is that it would bed* criminatory. HEW would get* upset because we would be dept' | ing substandard students oftk* i “right" to a good education. (Mod consider 1 these students minorities.) The distrubing factor in thewto issue is that as our enrollm* 1 [ skyrockets, new buildings areto and classes get bigger and morei* personal. The qualitative things^' make A&M different are lostP shuffle. The new lounge in thebld is symptomatic of this. loaf* people it is very attractive. Unf® tunately, it just isn’t A&M as* know it. Within only a few year*' will be considered a part ofAfd Five years from now the nor® 1 student will probably not eventl® ; twice about the “wall”, the “Gold' Arches” or the MSC lounge. Tti'j ^ will have long since been assi® lated into what he conceives “Just think of it as small personal sacrifice that you’re making while our campus is being beautified!’ to be. What can be done about our® cent increase in Building Use Fe®* Well, actually nothing — excel maybe bitch a whole lot. What® be done for the future? Responsd action must be taken by both ft Legislature and the Governor to® crease our own Board’s respond® ness to the students. Address correspondence to Listen Up, The Battalion, Room 217. Services Building, College Station, Texas 77843. Members of the Student Publications Board are: Jim Lindsey, chairman; Dr. Tom Adair, Dr. R. A. Albanese, Dr. H. E. Hierth, W. C. Harrison, Steve Eberhard, Don Hegi, and John Nash, Jr. Represented nationally by National Educational Advertising Services, Inc., New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles. Editor Greg Moses Assistant Editor Will Anderson Managing Editor LaTonya Perrin Assistant Managing Editor Roxie Hearn Sports Editor Mike Bruton Photo Editor Glen Johnson City Editor Rod Speer News Editors Barbara West Douglas Winship Reporters . . . T. C. Gallucci, Tony Gallucci, Paul McGrath, Robert Cessna, Gerald Olivier, Rose Mary Traverse, Steve Gray, Judy Baggett, Alan Killingsworth, Sayeeful Islam, Mary Jeanne Quebe, Cathryn Clement, Robin Schriver, Cindy Maciel. PEANUTS All Right, who MOVED THE TV ?! ,