Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 10, 1979)
»V’ Slouch by Jim Earle “To recap our conversation, you feel that the course on how to study that you re taking is cutting into your study time?” Opinion A&M’s ‘factory’ needs some air A degree-granting factory takes a high school graduate and produces a money-making “consumer unit” with effi ciency. And Texas A&M University is very efficient. But in processing toward graduation, a person can be stamped into too tight a mold. With hours and hours of required courses, the high schooler’s focus narrows to a restricted specialty. The “air” that rounds a person’s perspective and opens his mind is forced out. Electives are supposed to prevent that, but often they don’t. Through formal and informal channels, the few electives in some curricula are directed to the department’s goals, not the student’s. Over the years, departments have ^justified more re quirements. There’s more to learn, they say. For instance, the “practical” majors — such as engineer ing, agriculture and the sciences -— tend to concentrate solely on their major courses of study. Many liberal arts students can slide through academic life without taking a decent, difficult science course. A well-rounded liberal arts, or for that matter, any uni versity education cannot neglect fields outside certain majors. Balanced knowledge tends to make for balanced graduates. The student has been short-changed. Someone must speak for the student. Thursday, some one can. The Academic Council — deans, department heads and other selected faculty — will consider a proposal that would put air back into the system. It would allow students to choose nine hours of electives — free electives — from departments other than his own. And his department could not tell him what those electives must be. It’s a change students need. Even factories let in a little fresh air. The Battalion U S P S 045 360 LETTERS POLICY Lettinrs 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 guarantee to publish any letter. Each letter must be signed, show the address of the writer and list a telephone number for verification. Address correspondence to Letters to the Editor, The Battalion, Room 216, Reed McDonald Building, College Station, Texas 77843. Represented nationally by National Educational Adver tising Services, Inc., New York City, Chicago and Los Angeles. The Battalion is^published Monday through Friday from September through May except during exam and holiday periods and the summer, when it is published on Tuesday hrough Thursday. Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per semester; $33.25 per school year; $35.00 per full year. Advertising rates furnished on request. Address; The Battalion, Room 216, Reed McDonald Building, College Station, Texas 77843. United Press International is entitled exclusively to the use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it. Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein reserved. Second-Class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843. 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 MEMBER Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Congress Editor Liz Newlin Managing Editor Andy Williams Asst. Managing Editor Dillard Stone News Editors . .Karen Comelison and Michelle Burrowes Sports Editor Sean Petty City Editor Roy Bragg Campus Editor Keith Taylor Focus Editors ..... Beth Calhoun and Doug Graham StaflF Writers Meril Edwards, Nancy Andersen, Louie Arthur, Richard Oliver, Mark Patterson, Carolyn Blosser, Kurt Allen Photo Editor . . .Lee Roy Leschper Jr. Photographers Lynn Blanco, Sam Stroder, _ , Ken Herrerra Cartoonist Doug Graham Regents. 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. Viewpoint The Battalion Texas A&M University Wednesday October 10, 1979 J f Reader’s Forum The real power struggle: Miss Lillian versus Rose By El Bj Men on Si lok am ate text to the Chinese if Taiwan. The comp ler Audito |500 sittinj ie edge of By W. SCOTT SHERMAN Apparently no one has divined where the real power lies in both the Carter and the Kennedy camps. Much discussion has been given to whether Ted Kennedy will decide to run or whether Jimmy Carter will go for a sec ond term. The actual decision over who will be the Democratic candidiate for president in 1980 will be made at an undisclosed Holi day Inn in Upper Appalachia — when Rose Kennedy and Lillian Carter meet to decide whose son will carry the party ban- The meeting has not yet been an nounced, but it is a logical course, since no two American mothers have had greater influence over such politically important sons since Millard Fillmore’s mother con vinced her son to install indoor plumbing in the White House. With all the possibilities of the better “Godzilla Meets King Kong” movies, in siders believe the choice of a moderator will probably be the first point of conten tion. Mrs. Kennedy is rumored to want Henry Cabot Lodge or Gore Vidal. Miss Lillian is allegedly undecided between Bert Parks and Howard Cosell. Insiders say Gov. Jerry Brown may be a compromise emcee since no one is sure exactly where he stands, what he stands for, or if he is animal, vegetable or bio degradable. Ground rules for the talk have not been disclosed but unofficial sources believe the following are included: 1. Mrs. Carter will not mention Chap- paquiddick, Ted’s cheating at Harvard, his marital problems, anything about prob lems with the Kennedy Klan Kids, and any other incriminating personal information about the senator as long as Mrs. Kennedy doesn’t mention Amy or Billy. 2. Hamilton Jordan will be referred to at all times by his Christian name, regardless of what euphemism either side feels ap propriate. 3. The President’s hemorrhoid prob lems will not be brought up as long as Mrs. Carter doesn’t mention Mrs. Kennedy’s hernial difficulties. This is to be referred to as the “Strain not to rub me the wrong way” rule. 4. No mention will be made of the now infamous Bonzai Bunny incident where the president was “attacked” by a swim ming rabbit April 20, two days before Eas ter. However, if two days before Thanksgiving, the president is attacked by a turkey, the Kennedy camp reserves the right to refer to the incident as can nibalism on the bird’s part. 5. Neither side will claim “heavenly intervention” no matter how many audi ences they have had with Pope John Paul II, Muhammed Ali or Howard Cosell. The question of how to decide a winner is probably the prime point. Some observers feel a nude team-tag wrestling match would be appropriate, but both sides are rumored to favor a panel to hear the oratory from the two proud po tential presidential parents. Composition of the board is at question. The Kennedy group is alleged to want members to have either one home in Martha’s Vineyard or Taiwanese citizen ship. Critics claim such a group will be hard to find with any guarantee of impar tiality. The Carter family maintains a group of good ole Ixjys will be fine, as look at the president’s recordwil ing anger, frustration or doubtin] ability. Cynics say they have found such a panel. The problem is either they*; pants a lot and will be unable told 1980, or the Brooklyn Zoo cant them long enough to 1 make anyt W. Scott Sherman is a in staffer management and a fornifp ■ CHI v. One perfi nd on top ttles, oth gs of kni\ jipped cups anced on 1 The act tl lion in the : a male per the rings 'blindfoldei somersaull through the R Bf a trick Bnagician lifhich rem pligiiring it i One may jar by me along one n>uch it. I A partic: Mark Thur lift the jar Thurmai ot, said “ The jar nooth. ” To sum ) tricks a The Tue insored Broder House bill provides scrap of sanitii in otherwise nasty campaign finan By DAVID S. BRODER WASHINGTON — It took barely 15 minutes for the House to pass H.R. 5010 earlier this month, and no one even asked for a roll-call vote. In the rush of events, few people have bothered to note what has happened. To be honest, it hardly rates up there with the pope’s visit to the United States or the Soviet brigade in Cuba as a news story. But H.R. 5010 is a small step toward sanity in the rules regulating the conduct of the American elections. It also is a timely demonstration that, even in Con gress, common sense can occasionally pre vail over crasser instincts. The background on the bill is this: In its rush to “reform” the smelly campaign fi nance practices revealed by Watergate, Congress five years ago legislated some new restricitons that had a chilling effect on the local, volunteer political party ac tivity that can add so much to the average citizen’s sense of involvement in the choice of the President. With Treasury funds financing the Carter-Ford contest, and tight spending limits in effect, there was a natural ten dency to hoard the scarce dollars for the “big-ticket items,” particularly purchase of television time and rental of jet planes to move the candidates around the country. As a strategy for mass-marketing politi- cans to the national constituency, the airport-television studio approach was eminently sensible. But, as almost every observer of the last presidential campaign noted, the local, small-scale electioneer ing, which traditionally has provided so much of the color and flavor of American politics, was sadly missing in 1976. In many big-city neighorhoods and in most small towns, there was nothing to suggest that America was choosing a President — no local headquarters, no banners, no bumper-stickers, no buttons, and almost no volunteer activity. The reason was simple: The national campaign headquarters allocated virtually no money for local electioneering. And local party organizations were inhibited or intimidated by the new rules from doing much of anything on their own. The threat of prosecution for failing to report on the cost of such activities or spending beyond the limits was enough to keep most local Republican and Demo cratic activists out of the Ford and Carter campaigns. The House bill addresses this problem directly by providing a blanket exemption for state and local party committees to purchase, without limit, the buttons, bumper stickers, yard-signs and other campaign materials used by volunteers. It also exempts those committees from any limits on what they may spend for voter registration and get-out-the-vote cam paigns on behalf of their presidenial tick ets. Reporting requirements are elimi nated for party committees raising or spending less than $5,000 — rather than the $1,000 floor that was used in the old law. The effect — and intent — of the House-passed amendments is to encour age, rather than inhibit, local, volunteer involvement in the presidential campaign by Democratic and Republican commit tees. Along the increase in the federal sub sidy of the national party conventions, from $2 million to $3 million apiece, these provisions make H.R. 5010 the most posi tive measure for the strengthening of the political parties to move through Congress in years. What is equally remarkable is the man ner of the bill’s passage. After years of bit ter partisan battles over other kinds of campaign-finance legislation, particularly the recurrent proposals for public subsidy of congressional campaigns, the quarrel some Democrats and Republicans House Administration Committee it was time to get their act togeth Texas A fmember ( rst publie ar Satui g gene 0TC Re The Cc Field at ] efore the ouston i Brig. G OTC R 'ort Rile> g officei ials will land or adium. Fye wi orps at' Chairman Frank Thompson JmI and Rep. Bill Frenzel (R-Minn.)a! legislate in the areas where! agreement was possible, and to J issues where they had split time anil “Thompson and I agreed,” Fredl “it was time to stop cat-fightintsf something that had to be done.l suit was that, as Thompson committee finds itself in the unusai tion of being awash in a sea of o acclaim.” thf J With unanimous and bipartisan from the committee members, passed by the House in the hi eye. A similar measure, also0 bipartisan support, is awaiting flor 1 in the Senate. It’s not a bigstoiy, encouraging testimony forth would like to believe that both the?' parties and the Congress can lod lively and responsible than they the past. (c) 1979, The Post Company Letters Ex-marine appalled at attitude hen toward display of real guns at MSC Editor: I’ve just come from the MSC where I just experienced a most disgusting thing! It had to do with a marine captain, a .30- caliber machine gun and some dumpy lit tle man telling this Marine captain that Col. Woodall didn’t like the idea of having that weapon on public display. That it just wasn’t proper to have such a thing in the MSC and would he please remove it. I was standing next to the captain and I almost threw up. Naturally, the captain was embarassed, but very cooperative. I am really amazed! I spent nine years in the USMC myself and 23 months on two tours to Vietnam. What the hell is wrong with you people? Are there nothing more here than little tin soldiers afraid of big bad guns? Sure, that .30-caliber is a dangerous weapon capable of killing many people; believe me it works great, I’ve seen it in action. War is the bottom issue here. War isn’t nice, guns aren’t nice, killing isn’t nice. Neither is seeing your buddy blown into a million pieces. You’re damn right, war is hell, it isn’t fantasy, it isn’t TV, it isn’t movies. Maybe more people should be aware of the little toys of war, and just where their tax dollars are going. The nerve of that man, the nerve of Col. Woodall! This letter will never get printed in your precious little pro-Corps Battalion. I used to have great respect for the Corps here. Now, I am not so sure. Excuse me while I throw up now! — Joe Dirkson USMC 1968-1977 Have more pride Editor: This letter pertains to the situation which will occur this weekend at the U of H game. I had heard the rumors of what had happened to some of the Aggies’ cars when they traveled to Rice Stadium for the BYU game. It seemed like the Rice Owls thought it a cute joke by putting Hoot’em stickers over the Aggies Gig ’em stickers and by putting shaving cream on Aggies’ door handles. Well when I traveled to Waco for the Baylor game the situation was the same. It seemed some of the Bear fans were of even lower class than the Owls by spitting on the Aggies’ cars. The situation this weekend is reversed as the Aggies are the host team. W make the inconvenience of Kyle f seating capacity worse by treat®! guest to a rude awakening when4 turn to their cars after the garnet only rude awakening of the Roust® be. the realization of the fact thattfl gies are for real! Show that Fightin Texas Aggie 5 and let’s not lower our school to tie that other SWC representatives Thotz