Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 20, 1981)
Viewpoint Vin The Battalion Texas A&M University Tuesday January 20,1980 p United Press AUSTIN - Sp " that died iars ago are coir ith a new versioi ore acceptable ih about privacy The Senate bill loaded with safeg m of privacy, d, D-Texarkai Slouch By Jim Earle “It’s unique, but I think it needs more testing before your umbrella design is introduced to the market ” Carter’s rejection is era By DAVID S. BRODER WASHINGTON — Jimmy Carter was a pro duct of his time — “a time of transition, ” as he said in his farewell address, “an uneasy era ...” That the nation was uneasy with his leadership and rejected his bid for a second term may be less a reflection on his shortcomings as a Presi dent than an evidence of the fitful spirit of the age. Jimmy Carter was a Southerner, shaped by his witness of the civil rights revolution in which black men and women — as he often movingly said — liberated reluctant and resis tant whites from the shackles of their own fears and prejudices. He came away believing that the cause of civil rights-equal rights-human rights was one America must carry around the world, even to lands whose rulers found it as frightening as had Carter’s own generation in Georgia. Jimmy Carter was a sixth-generation farmer, with a love of the land and enough engineering and scientific training to know how mines and dams and chemicals — to say nothing of negli gence and greed — could destroy the land. For him, the conservation ethic became a moral imperative as strong as his passion for human rights and his fear of nuclear war. Jimmy Carter was a small entrepreneur, not just in business but in politics. While big busi ness made economic life hard for men like him, the shattering of the big party structures opened unrivaled opportunities in politics. He had the wit to see that, in a time of institutional fragmentation, the “friends and neighbors” technique he had learned in the non-party poli tics of Georgia could be parlayed into presiden tial victories in places like Iowa and New Hampshire. It is impossible to imagine a man like Jimmy Carter being nominated and elected President in any other year of our history. Had the civil rights revolution not enfranchised Southern blacks, he could not have won. Had the old leaders and leadership-recruitment systems of the Democratic Party not been shattered by the bitter internal conflicts over Vietnam, he could not have won. Had the Republican Party not been disgraced by Watergate, he could not have won. It is hard to remember now, as he leaves the White House, how gratefully he was received by the American people just four years ago. His arrival on the national scene was a surprise, but his assurances that he was not a racist, not a warmonger, not a crook were what the voters wanted to hear. That he was unable to rise above the cir cumstances that made his election possible and shape a consensus for governing effectively is hardly a condemnation. It would have taken a leader of extraordinary skills to do that, and Jimmy Carter was not that man. As his own closest associates know, he was hobbled by his almost complete lack of eloqu ence and was embarrassed by his too-easy toler ance of mediocre performance by some of his too-familiar aides. He was victimized by one of the characteristic failings of the age — the belief in expertise. Some of the “expert” energy and economic advice he received was way off the mark. His personality was such that he could not easily gain the trust and affection of other politi cians. He was unable to persuade them to take risks on his behalf of his policies, even when Carter and the policies were right. It was a flaw of character which came as no surprise to the politicians of his home state or those who served as fellow-governors with him. But their views did not count in the system in which Jimmy Carter was nominated. Whatever his failings, Carter was true to his own principles as president. He avoided milit ary conflict; he protected land and resources; he spread the message of human rights. But he was unable to discipline the threatening forces in this transitional world: the energy-fed inflation, the technological decline of American heavy industry, the spread of militant Muslim theoc racy, the imperialist tendencies of Soviet power. So he is leaving, as his four predecessor Presidents left — without completing what we once thought of as a “normal” two-term cycle. His departing words were modest: “I am looking forward to the opportunity to reflect and further to assess — I hope with accuracy — the circumstances of our times. ” It is an activity in which all of us could profitably join, as yet another new President takes up the burden of leadership. Warped TV is already dull enough | The new bill, By STEVE GERSTEL United Press International WASHINGTON — In one of his first acts as majority leader, Howard Baker suggested the Senate move boldly into the 20th century and finally permit live television of the daily pro ceedings. Maybe it will happen. But the idea, which has been around for a long time, has never come to fruition. There must be something about modern-day wonders that terrifies senators. They resist adv anced technology in any form. Symbolic of the attitude are the little ink and sand holders on each desk, the pair of snuff boxes and the two spittoons, although Herman Talmadge of Georgia, last of the ’baccy chew- ers, has now departed. It seems to have always been that way. Only recently did the Senate finally succumb to the world of microphones and sound amplifiers. Although the learning process was somewhat slow, senators finally overcame their terror and now even the most traditional of them willingly clip on the mikes when they speak. Alas, neither radio nor television has en joyed such acceptance in the Senate chamber, although both are royally welcome at commit tee hearings. The first intrusion of the electronic media into the hallowed Senate chamber was in 1929 with a radio broadcast of the swearing-in of Charles Curtis of Topeka, Kan. That must have been a traumatic proceeding. The experiment was not tried again for almost 50 years when the Panama Canal treaty debate was aired. Television has not done even that well. The only time the television cameras were allowed to intrude was during the swearing-in of Nelson Rockefeller as vice president in 1973. Senate Majority Leader Robert Byrd, at one point, was interested in televising the Panama Canal debate. Whether he planned it as a fore runner of gavel-to-gavel coverage of all pro ceedings or just a one-shot effort was not clear. But the debate was never seen on television. Some say the problem of lights — too much heat and glare — was the reason. Others insist that Byrd was never that keen on television. The House has had television for two years now and there is no question that the medium has brought about some changes. Yet, they Bill Clemen i, makes an ilk :ee felony and gi taps the right t Only the dirt Jepartment of P apparently are not serious enough to win ^ uest a 0 abandoning the show. Jy a DPS office House sessions have lengthened as conj p. Local police v men read speeches that were once insert? zed to tap wire: the record. And there is a tendency to oral officer r meaningless hills — a practice once the ould have to sh vince of the Senate. gj Balancing these minuses is a tendency® ^ ’ wou |j congressmen to dress better and rehearse) j 39 j ays ^ 0 they are going to say, providing a smoot t necessary for more coherent delivery. Taps would be Senators would be subject to the samees jony drug cases ses, probably even more. Some ofthemb (e0 f tendency to speak at great length, unconcei ^druetraffic, that the chamber is empty. Television ytj.yifon ^ faithfully send out and record for posterii) W pl e we’re tryi ery one of those gems. jgguys, the sm Yet from time to time — not frequentlj *| ers ’ not there are some notable debates on majoriss "p^y're s0 w that raise the level of rhetoric, although bans ^ '7h ey y, av senator now in service qualifies as a greali BUin ed names, tor. Those would be worth seeing. “Acording to tl For the most part, however, Senateproa eard, they do 1 ings are terminally dull. Perhaps Baker sin ipecially in Tex; reconsider before allowing the public in 01 secret. j —^ NOW REPLACING CARTER v ATQtlARTERBACL.NUMBER.OIC \ TUPPmKlFCPfM cnnrurDM > United Pres DENVER -1 oys know it tak nd boots to makt m’t begrudge mitators. “Hell, we’ve urselves for a 1 ever did us an; lidson, who con ale, Calif, for 1! iig. "It’s a comp Ttisacomplii tyne, to Roy R good that p said Larry' 1-Round Work “Cowboys wi ; M said Dei idtsdale, Ariz, md fewer rang bey’re all athl wboy can t ai lose the movie Reiners, wo dampion in 1U "rankled some Mwboys who “p todec stars. Life in the First National Closet SALES • "When’ si Banking s come a long way, baby By DICK WEST United Press International WASHINGTON — Recent changes in bank ing laws have spawned a staggering variety of deposit plans. You can now open checking accounts that draw interest. Savings institutions for the first time offer checking accounts. Some accounts have bill-payer features. There is a wide selec tion of monthly statements to choose from. Minimum deposits needed to avoid service charges vary widely, as do the service charges themselves. And so on. Or, if this multiplicity of options fails to meet your banking needs, you may opt to open an account in the First National Closet. As we have learned from the headlines in recent months, the First National Closet, like banks 1 and savings establishments, offers a verit able smorgasbord of accounts and services. You can, if you choose, start an overcoat sav ings account. It is particularly convenient for depositing small bills pressed upon you by admirers. It is true an overcoat savings account does not pay interest. But that disadvantage is more than balanced by the fact that there is no penalty for early withdrawal. A depositor can take money out of overcoat savings at any hour of the day or night. And, as was made clear during hearings by the Senate Ethics Committee, so can the depositor’s spouse. Another service offered by First National Closet is the safe deposit shoe. Here is how it works: Say you have some money that for some reason you don’t wish to deposit in a regular overcoat account. You can arrange to put it in a safe deposit shoe and nobody will know it is there until your spouse finds it. Say, for example, an FBI agent posing as an oil-rich Arab sheik gives you $50,000 in ex change or some sort of promised favor. A safe deposit shoe would be an ideal place to keep part of the money. It also makes a handy repository for funds people have contributed to pay your legal ex penses and for money your mother gives) Like an overcoat savings account, howevc safe deposit shoe is not spouse-proof. TheFi National Closet provides no deposit insuran that would cover a case in which an estraif spouse discovers the money and tells thewd about it. A third type of deposit plan available at Fi National Closet is the shoe box account. Ths the type publicized by a former Illinois st official. It is similar to an overcoat account and a safe deposit shoe except that# money is kept in shoe boxes. Obviously, opinions will differ as to the type of account. But nobody can argue banking hasn’t come a long way since peoi kept their meager hoard in the Farmer’s Merchant’s National Mattress. By Scott McCullar AH, IT'5 ACTUALLY GOOD TO BE BACK ON CAMPUS AGAIN, WITH ALL THE FA/A I L IA fi SIGHTS... HELLO RUPPER*, HELLO mLIE KDLUE, HELLO H\SC, HELLO Hf\RRlNGT0N } HELLO 5 3/5A. ir 7 i L The Battalion U S P S 0-15 360 Sales MEMBER Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Congres: Questions or comments concerning any editorial matter should be directed to the editor. Editor Dillard Stone Managing Editor Angelique Copeland Asst. Managing Editor Todd Woodard City Editor Debbie Nelson Asst. City Editor Marcy Boyce News Editors Venita McCellon, Scot K. Meyer Sports Editor Richard Oliver Focus Editor Cathy Saathoff Asst. Focus Editor Susan Hopkins Staff Writers Jennifer Afflerbach, Carolyn Barnes, Jane G. Brust, Terry Duran, Cindy Gee, Jon Heidtke,. Belinda McCoy, Liz Newlin, Kathy O’Connell, Rick Stolle Cartoonist Scott McCullar Photo Editor Greg Gammon LETTERS POLICY Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in lenfl and are subject to being cut if they are longer. The editorial st® reserves the right to edit letters for st\ le and length, hut make every effort to maintain the author's intent. Each lei' 11 must also be signed, show the address and phone mimhernfth' writer. Columns and guest editorials are also welcome, and aren^ subject to the same length constraints as letters. Address W inquiries and correspondence to: Editor, The Battalion, 2^ Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, College Station. T 77843. EDITORIAL POLICY The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper op erated as a community service to Texas A&M University and Bryan-College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the editor or the author, and do not necessarily repre sent the opinions of Texas A&M University administrators or faculty members, or of the Board of Regents. The Battalion is published daily during Texas A&M’s fall W spring semesters, except for holiday and examination period^ Mail subscriptions are $16.75 per semester. $33.25 per schow year and $35 per full year. Advertising rates furnished ontr quest. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Buildinf- Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77833. United Press International is entitled exclusively to thrust for reproduction of all news dispatches credited to it. RieliU 0, j reproduction of all other matter herein reserved. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77843