Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (May 4, 1982)
opinion Slouch By Jim Earle “I think we had better sweep the floor. ” Falklands may be the easy problem by Arnold Sawislak United Press International WASHINGTON — It has taken the politicians in Washington longer to ar rive at an agreement on the federal budget than for the British Navy to steam the 8,000 miles from England to the Falk land Islands. And, notwithstanding the shooting that already has transpired, it may be easier for the United Kingdom and Argentina to settle their dispute than for President Reagan and Speaker dip O’Neill to come together on a spending and taxing plan for the United States that satisfies both. It also is likely that if Reagan and O’Neill do find the basis for an agree ment, there will be plenty of howling ab out it — including charges of betrayal — in Washington and elsewhere. Why? Because, for the first time in many years, Washington is witnessing a relatively even contest between diamet rically opposed notions of what the Un ited States government is supposed to be doing. It is not oversimplification to say that Reagan believes that the government should be out of most of the social prog rams and regulatory activities it began after World War II and that O’Neill be lieves that most of them — at least in concept — are essential to the well being of the nation. Reagan’s view prevailed last year be cause the defenders of activist govern ment were demoralized by the 1980 elec tion and because the administration sur prised them by using the budget to cut social programs instead of trying to re peal them outright. O’Neill and his allies were routed. But Reagan also got the huge tax cut he asked and, with the recession, that appears likely to produce $100 billion- plus federal deficits for several years to come. The prospect of a huge deficit in an administration committed to a balanced budget gave Reagan’s supporters a bad case of nerves and his opponents a place to stand and fight. They are demanding that the big defense spending increases Reagan seeks be cut back and either a delay in f urther tax cuts or some kind of temporary tax increase. The administration, faced with revolt in Congress, apparently is willing to make some cuts in its defense spending plans, but the president wants more re ductions, such as an end or a f reeze on cost-of-living increases in social prog rams. O’Neill may give some in that area, but he apparently draws the line at any change in the inflation protection built into the Social Security program. In the usual White House-Capitol Hill conflict, there is room for manuevering, some middle ground where each can give and take. It is said that the two sides in Congress could have reached an accom modation long ago, but this deal requires the assent of the President, who is not used to this kind of dickering. Both Reagan and O’Neill are resolute men. The President feels too much com promise will destroy his economic recov ery program; the speaker feels that more retreat on social programs will devastate the poor and near poor. It could take longer for them to cut a deal than for the British and Argentines to come to terms on the control of that rocky paradise for sheep in the South Atlantic. The Battalion USPS 045 360 Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference Editor Diana Sultenfuss Managing Editor Phyllis Henderson Associate Editor Denise Richter City Editor Bernie Fette Assistant City Editor Gary Barker Sports Editor Frank L. Christlieb Focus Editor Nancy Floeck Assistant Focus Editor Colette Hutchings News Editors. . Tracey Buchanan, Cathy Capps, Daniel Puckett, Mary Jo Rummel, Staff Writers Cyndy Davis, Susan Dittman, Beverly Hamilton, John Lopez, Hope E. Paasch, Bill Robinson, Dana Smelser, Joe Tindel, John Wagner, Laura Williams, Rebeca Zimmermann Cartoonist Scott McCullar Graphic Artist Richard DeLeon Jr. Photographers David Fisher, Jane Hollingsworth Peter Rocha, John Ryan, Colin Valentine Editorial Policy The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting news paper operated as a community service to Texas A&M University and Bryan-College Station. Opinions ex pressed in The Battalion are thse of the editor or the author, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Texas A&M University administrators or faculty mem bers, or of the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students in reporting, editing and photography clas ses within the Department of Communications. Questions or comments concerning any editorial mat ter should be directed to the editor. Letters Policy Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in length, and are subject to being cut if they are longer. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author’s intent. Each letter must also be signed, show the address and phone number of the writer. Columns and guest editorials are also welcome, and are not subject to the same length constraints as letters. Address all inquiries and correspondence to: Editor, The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M Uni versity, College Station, TX 77843, or phone (713) 845- 2611. The Battalion is published daily during Texas A&M's fall and spring semesters, except for holiday and exami nation periods. Mail subscriptions are $ 16.75 per semes ter, $33.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Adver tising rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 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. Battalion™ May 4, MS I Political psychology changes by David S. Broder WASHINGTON — A year ago on April 28, President Ronald Reagan scored an oratorical triumph that pre saged a great political victory. In his first public appearance since the attempt on his life, Reagan came before a joint ses sion of Congress to make a dramatic and effective plea for his budget and tax program. Swept forward by waves of applause from both sides of the aisle, Reagan asked the rhetorical question: “Isn’t ii time we tried something new?” Within three months, Congress — responding to the public pressures he generated — had enacted “something new,” deeji budget cut and even deeper tax reductions. That occasion is worth recalling now, a year later, as a reminder of the psycholo gy of a bygone era. How different was it? Here are three answers from the news papers of that week. Then, Sen. Bob Packwood of Oregon, the chairman of the Republican Senato rial Campaign Committee, was predict ing great gains for the COP in the 1982 election because polls Showed millions of disaffected Democrats being drawn by Reagan’s leadership into the COP. Last month, the same Packwood infuriated the White House by saying that Reagan’s positions on equal rights for women and civil rights for minorities were damaging the party severely. “We are losing them in droves,” he said, of working women. “You cannot write them off and the blacks off and the Hispanics off and Jews off, and assume you’re going to build a party on the white Anglo-Saxon males over 40.” Then, it was front-page news that a group of “Boll-Weevil" Southern Demo cratic Congressmen were ready to bolt party lines and give Reagan effective con trol of the House on economic issues. “The Democratic Party (in the House) is not representing our interests,” Reji. John B. Breaux (D-La.) was quoted April 26 as saying. “Fiscal philosophy is the di viding line. If I voted against the Reagan budget ... [people would would say Breaux is trying to stop Reagan’s effort to bring back fiscal sanity.” Last week, the same John Breaux told the same Washinton Post reporter, Mar got Hornblower: “The climate this year is different. Our group would vote down the President’s budget. The deficit is too high. The cuts are too high in areas which have already been cut. Defense spending is too high.” The mood of Congress that week of 1981 was captured in a story T.R. Reid wrote for The Post: “Liberal fire met con servative ice in a House hearing room yesterday, and the result — for so great is President Reagan’s strength on Capitol Hill right now — was predictable: Budget director David Stockman skated easily through the heated attacks of liberal cri tics. With cool, almost icy, assurance, Stockman set forth before the House Education and Labor Committee the administration’s proposals for cutting back various education, job-training and school lunch programs.” Stockman’s statistics were challenged; Rep. Peter A. Peyser (D-N.Y.) said: “You’re in the wonderf ul work of make- believe.” But Stockman coolly rejected the charge, leading committee Chairman Carl Perkins (D-Ky.), who had come to Congress when Stockman was a two- year-old, to say of the stubborn, preco cious witness: “If he says he doesn’t be lieve our assumptions, I don’t suppose he’s going to change his mind.” Stockman made only one coi that day; he promised, as Reidw extend his austerity decrees to fense Department, which has escaped unscathed ...” “Their turn is coming next,"Stl said. “There’s so much waste ini fense budget it’s taken usalittleloi figure it out.” These days, Stockman is much! ble, perhaps because the whole knows — thanks to William Gi Atlantic interviews — that those “make-believe” figures. And it that Stockman was blocked from ing Def ense “waste” snd orderedi to submit a Defense budget whiclt 17 percent increase on top ol last 25 percent boost. A year after he lit the fire unde gress to pass his budget and tax pa President Reagan is saying it is to to judge the results. He is sayinff i i c/j* '11 I f 11 *-» » »■» *-»'» c i i tlvitLH because of all the measures that! as crying out f or urgent action— »y Stanto rates, unemployment, real earninJi f° r business bankruptcies — only one! ” measurably worse today: the rate™ ’ tion. iMlgl] Referring to the span of time hi election to his address to 6 flYPll Reagan said a year ago: “Six moil long enough. 1 he American peopl| want us to act, and not in half me»° ^ acu ' They demand, and they have eal a * um ^ full and comprehensive effort tocll^ ^ 11 „ ering s a our econonnc mess. okstandi 1 he Packwoods and the BreauxsK lc [ 1 j n g. recanted; the Peysers and PerkiiiKHoust seen their judgment vindicated;|ard, w Stockmans have retreated into pn|o Dr. I silence. cnginee But the President persists, and«'> a n ^ the “economic mess.” npmeerin rxipient : COLUMBOj OGPNCU- ...l CANT BELIE/E IT. A. MAN R ACCUSED OF SH0OTIN6 A PRFStDENi; AND THE FEDERAL COURTS TAKE RSJE7ER TO BRING IT TO TRIAL. wymmi- Notes from a graduating senior Editor: — Always pay cash. — The amount of liquor consumed and hour of night are directly propor tional to the range of your standards. — Learn to dance. — Avoid parking tickets. If you hap pen to get one, j^ay it IMMEDIATELY! — Prats and sororities apjdy vacuum pressure. — 90 percent of f reshmen (and some sophomores and juniors) act like high school brats. — Establish a drinking lethal limit and stay UNDER it. Co directly to jail — j^ay $57.50 for public intoxication. — Profs aren’t always right. — Shy away from “meat locker” clubs unless you enjoy being graded like a side of beef. — Some of my best friends are GTs. — Daddy’s money and snobbery go hand-in-hand (usually). — Dating can be fun and inexpensive if you use the University wisely, i.e., MSC films, MSC basement, Town Hall, OPAS, Theater Arts, etc. — Where you sit at a football game doesn’t matter — it’s being there that counts. — The shuttle bus is rarely on time and later if the weather is nasty or cold. — Sbisa dining is great for the jn'ice. — Dorm functions are a great way to meet girls/guys. — If you go to a basketball game, watch it. Don’t vocalize your narrow minded opinion. — Spirals are a waste of money. Buy a folder with clasps and pockets, and work from there — it’s cheaper. — Xerox as little as possible when doing research papers. It’s a bad habit to get into and usually costs most of your {socket money. — Socialists, Communists, religious fanatics, feminists and gays on campus should be ignored until they invade your tliej privacy or take up your time. Then only then ACT! — Return reference books to er shelf. You’re not the only one w them. — Concrete has a life span of abo years ... stay the HELL off the grai — Smile and say Howdy. He o won’t bite. — Always be an Aggie — here or mM Finis Mark 2352 Chii Coi Where did all the ‘good Ags’ go i Editor: the small society by Brickman I am writing this letter in referei the widespread problem of scholastk 1 honesty that has been plaguing 1< A&M University. When I look at week’s occurences (Mr. Haller’s altd grades and gaining access to the Uni Woo-^oy! Y<?U'(Z£ 0LP raJ -Stf UTTUS. - THAT LITTLE )1981 King Features Syndicate, Inc. World rights reserved. 6-18 sity computer), I wonder what ever pened to the Good Ags? I am noi jilying that a majority of people at university are involved in this kint offensive {practice. However, the pe ( who are involved are making the live* the rest of us miserable. To those dents, I would like to say: “Aggiesdo lie, cheat or steal, nor do they tolet those who do. I refuse to tolerate" and I sincerely hope my fellow Ags ! the same way. Let’s unite to present spirit of Aggieland. Saskia Ekelmans Spence I 2609
