V
The Battalion
-V IE WPOINT
September 15,1981
Slouch By Jim Earle Student Government editorial unfair
‘Must be the weather. I can’t get my mind off the bonfire.
Wall Street's assault
on Reaganomics unfair
By DAVID S. BRODER
WASHINGTON — Despite the hand
icaps of being a non-lawyer, a non-financial
expert and a non-partisan of the Reagan
administration, it is plain even to me that
the White House has grounds to sue Wall
Street for non-support. Ronald Reagan’s
economic plan is being mauled by the
money-managers even before it gets a trail
run. If the assault weren’t so recklessly self
ish and stupid, you could really laugh.
If ever there has been a government in
Washington eager to do acrobatics to please
the business and financial big shots, it is this
one. It has taken the biggest whack at feder
al spending in 50 years, and every nickel of
it from “people programs” that the monied
folks don’t need, don’t want, don’t use and
don’t support.
It has cut taxes generously for rich folks
and even more generously for corporations.
And the response has been one sulky bear
of a market, a tailspin in stocks and bonds
and a run-up in interest rates that have
given the country the shakes and cast a pall
over the bright economic future Reagan
and his allies projected. Thanks a bunch.
Wall Street.
However much Reagan and Co. have
contrived to get government off business’
back, the mighty men of the financial mar
kets have said, “It’s not enough. We want
more.”
Although Reagan never advertised it, the
tax bill he bulled through Congress goes a
long way toward eliminating the corporate
income tax as a significant source of federal
revenues. A top lobbyist for the bill says it
will cut the corporate tax bills in half. But a
lawyer I know has a client company that
paid $42 million last year and will pay some
where between $2 million and nothing next
year. Given the creativity of corporate
accounting. I’ll bet that is far from unique.
The smart guys in Wall Street know this
— even if most of the average Joes who
were phoning their congressmen to pass
the Reagan tax bill did not. The smart guys
know what the tax bill means for corporate
cash flow and future after-tax profits.
They know these are the ingredients for
a booming stock market that would funnel
billions into job-creating investment. But
■ they ain’t buying stocks. Why? Because
they can make even more money cashing in
; on the incredible interest rates they can
l exact from government and private borrow
ers in the current debt-refinancing crunch.
As a top Washington business lobbyist
• put it, “They can make 20 percent, with
;■ virtually no risk, buying short-term govern
ment obligations, so why should they take
the risk of equity investments?”
From one viewpoint, you could say
Reagan is getting exactly what he deserves,
as a true believer in the historically dubious
theory that there is a “natural harmony”
between business advantage and the public
interest. Having exalted the virtues of the
marketplace, he is now seeing his own
program victimized by men who calculate
every thing by the bottom-line calculus of
the coldly impersonal market. For Reagan
to “Jawbone” the financiers for lower in
terest rates, as congressional Republicans
suggest, would not just be ineffective, it
would be thoroughly inconsistent with his
own principles.
And yet it is stunning to see the big
wheels of Wall Street so callously scuttling
the very program that American business,
in a literally unprecedented fashion, prop
agandized and pressured Congress to pass
just a few weeks ago.
I asked my lobbyist friend, a key figure
in that effort, “Don’t they realize they have
bought in on Reagan’s program and they
have a stake in its working?” It was, appa
rently, a naive question.
“Let me tell you,” he said, “there is no
more shortsighted set of people that the
Wall Street financial community. I’d really
like to see Reagan tell these people to shove
it. They didn’t elect him and they don’t own
him.”
But, of course, Reagan is not doing that.
Instead, he is going back to Congress for yet
more cuts, in order to convince the money-
managers that he will someho\y_balance the
budget.
I thought to myself: The people who are
imposing these demands are people who
proclaim the virtues of risk-taking. But
they won’t take risks themselves. They are
the ones who say it’s time for school-lunch
users and subway riders to pay their own
way and even make some sacrifices. But
they will shortchange American enter
prises’ long-term capital needs in order to
make a little more fast money from high
interest rates.
My grandmother used to talk about peo
ple who know the price of everything and
the value for nothing. If these money-men
don’t understand that they will never have a
government more eager to please than this
Reagan outfit, and they sink its policies by
thier own short-sighted selfishness, then
they deserve what they will get.
It’s just too damn bad a lot of other
people will get hurt in the process.
Warped
As the school year began for the 1981-
1982 Texas A&M Student Government,
many high hopes were held. Many plans,
policies, and procedures have been careful
ly put together in hopes that this year could
be the best at Texas A&M.
It was hoped that the Student Senate
could be a powerful and moving force that
would bring much needed changes to
A&M. Contingency work is to be stressed
the most this year in an effort to gain what
Aggies want for their University and to
make the Senate a body of, for, and by
Aggies. However, when one senator comes
up with legislation to do just that he is ridi
culed by the press. My question: Is this the
way Aggies want their elected representa
tives treated?
I am particularly referring to an editorial
printed in The Battalion on Friday, Sep
tember 11. This reporter attacked several
bills aimed at making Texas A&M a better
and safer place to go to school. Specifically,
three senate bills were discussed: The
Pedestrian Protection Bill, the Motorcycle
and Moped Parking Spaces Bill, and the
Bicycle Registration Bill.
First, I ask the reader and this reporter,
to analyze the intent of the author in writing
these bills. Motorcycles and mopeds
parked on the sidewalks make our campus
unsafe and unsightly. Who among us has
not been walking across campus only to be
Reader's
Forum
nearly run-down by one of these riders rac
ing along at 40 mph to get to class. This is
what the author of the Pedestrian Protec
tion Bill is trying to stop.
Second, the Motorcycle and Moped
Parking Spaces bill follows along with the
first bill. Since some inconsiderate motor
cycle and moped riders park anywhere on
campus, they cause hazardous conditions
for pedestrians who are trying to get to
class. This is definitely a problem that must
be dealt with for the safety of all Texas A&M
students. Contrary to the opinion of one
reporter, this bill is not designed to in
crease the workload of campus police.
Finally, the Bicycle Registration Bill is
aimed at alleviating the overcrowdedness of
the campus. The main intent of the author
is to help students. In front of some build
ings (i.e. A&A, MSC, and the library) bicy
cle parking has made access to these build
ings a matter of walking an obstacle course.
I will be the first to admit that these!
may not be the best way to alleviate tin
problems, but a least somebody is tni
This brings me to the point of this art
The Student Senate is trying for you!!
don’t Battalion writers mention I
things that have been done by senal
Did you know that due to Senate act
Texas A&M has an organ donatingsys
under the title of the Eyes ofTexasAi
In addition, bills have been write
beautify the MSC, to remove rats fro®
Corps dorm area, and to provides
the girls dorms. Senate action of
resulted in the city of College Station!
ing moves to redesign the Northgates
to provide safety for the customers !
ion reporters also fail to mention I
senators from our student congressi
largely responsible for the defeat o(
state bill that would have raised you
tion by testifying in Austin.
It is my opinion that reporters
constructive criticism without al
senators and making them lookbadii
of the entire student body. Together
bring about changes that will maleli
A&M the campus and University wc
want it to be. Let’s work together and
fighting each other.
ick Al
signe
W. Michael Hat
Senator, Off Campus Wat
B
Students park at expense of staff
omp
Fulbrigh
irformi
the 1982
[Appro
luntrie;
luate sti
mic field
Ihg in the
js to si
try. Me
.broad
A&M Ur
Honal
A&M g r
guages, \
for 1981-1
rmany
Five t
offen
JeFulb
ound-tri
guage co
urance a
on for o:
grants of
with for
niversit
xed-sun
lenses,
'he p
er tl
id Cul
1961. Th
iyforeigi
ies and ]
ator s;
:omp<
'ards is
tute of Ii
| To be
Grant, a
izens a
[chelor
fore tl
|ant. T
didat.
e of
a l
Editor:
In the Thursday, September 10 edition
of The Battalion, there was yet another arti
cle on the shortage of parking spaces for
students. It pointed out that while there
were a number of spaces available in
“peripheral lots,” most students choose to
compete for the limited spaces that are lo
cated in the center of campus and closest to
their classes.
All the articles that have appeared on
this topic however, have failed to mention
that these students are often parking on
campus at the expense of faculty and staff
members. Since the beginning of classes,
there has been a lack of consideration and
disregard of parking policies exhibited by
many Texas A&M students.
taken advantage of when our own Random
Street parking spaces are considered “fair
game” by the students. We have been
forced to park in student lots because we
were unable to find spaces in our own desig
nated areas, then in turn, we are ticketed
for being in an unauthorized area.
The motivating force for this letter is the
fact that a University Police official in
formed us that if we were unable to park in
our own authorized spaces, that we should
go to the lot by Kyle Field or “wherever you
an awa
&ve bee
icountr
bring i'
fCreati
udents
Every single employee is hereto s P|“ ate
the students of Texas A&M, but their
difference between serving and beinJU®--!. —
can find an available space on campus
unfortunate that this individual:
such a lack of regard and concern foi
versity employee.
Alisa Mo#'
Editor’s note: This letter was
by seven other signatures.
We are sympathetic to the needs of the
students, but feel we are unfairly being
By Scott McCullar
HE7, THE Mn COMMISSION
ON THE ARTS IS TRYING
TO GET A FIRST-RATE ART
MUSEUM FOR THE UNIVER
SITY. that WOULD DE
GREAT!
AN ART MUSEUM, A CENTER
IN THE COMMUNITY FOR
PAINTINGS AND PHOTOGRAPHS,
AND, AND DRAWINGS, AND
THEY'D HAVE A COMPLETE
COLLECTION OF THIS COMIC
□
n , M ha Vih
HA/^
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
MEMBER
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Congress
Editor Angelique Copeland
Managing Editor Marcy Boyce
City Editor JaneG. Brust
Asst. City Editor Kathy O’Connell
Photo Editor Greg Gammon
Sports Editor Ritchie Priddy
Focus Editor Cathy Saathoff
Asst. Focus Editor Debbie Nelson
News Editors Jennifer Afflerbach
Bernie Fette, Belinda McCoy
Diana Sultenfuss
StaffWriters Frank L. Christlieb
Gaye Denley, Terry Duran, Nancy Floeck
Phyllis Henderson, Colette Hutchings
Denise Richter, Rick Stolle
Cartoonist Scott McCullar
Graphic Artist Richard DeLeon Jr.
Photographers Brian Tate
Becky Swanson, Dave Einsel
ty administrators or faculty members, or of the IW
Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory nempsp' 1
students in reporting, editing and photograi
within the Department of Communications.
Questions or comments concerning any editoni! >
should be directed to the editor.
LETTERS POLICY
Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 »;r-
length, and are subject to being cut if they are longer
editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters foriO*
length, but will make every effort to maintain the #
intent. Each letter must also be signed, show the ^
and phone number of the writer.
Columns and guest editorials are also welcome, a* 11
not subject to the same length constraints as
Address all inquiries and correspondence to: Edit*.
Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M Uni"
College Station, TX 77843.
ark
a Pf
EDITORIAL POLICY
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting newspaper
operated as a community service to Texas A&M University
and Bryan-College Station. Opinions expressed in The Bat
talion are those of the editor or the author, and do not
necessarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M Universi-
The Battalion is published daily during Texas AWf
and spring semesters, except for holiday and exai#
periods. M ail subscriptions are $ 16.75 per semester H
per school year and $35 per full year. Advertising^
furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonaldE'
ing, Texas A&M University, College Station, I\#
United Press International is entitled exclusively»
use for reproduction of all news dispatches credited C
Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein rese'-;
Second class postage paid at College Station, TXT^