Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (March 11, 1983)
Page 2/The Battalion/Friday, March 11, 1983 opinion I t Slouch By Jim Earle Proposed program to aid liquor safety by Dick West United Press International WASHINGTON — Most people probably agree with the maxim, “If it’s worth doing at all, it’s worth doing right.” But how many would subscribe to the addendum, “If it’s worth doing right, it’s worth over-doing?” The latter platitude is the motto of Dale Lowdermilk, head of one of this country’s most panicky safety organiza tions. As was perhaps inevitable, he fears the campaign to curtail drunk driving in America doesn’t go far enough. Lowdermilk, in private life a Santa Barbara, Calif., air traffic controller, is especially dubious about efforts to make bars, taverns and other such establish ments more careful about serving “the last drink” to patrons who obviously are in no condition to drive competently. His most immediate cause for alarm is a measure introduced in the California legislature to require the posting of “scorecards” in drinking places. The charts would set forth the state’s legal definition of intoxication and list the number of drinks it takes to impair the average person’s driving ability. “The concept of a ‘scorecard’ can, in and of itself, encourage competitive drinking,” Loudermilk warns in his latest media communique. To be on the safe side, he recommends that the government assign monitors “at every location where liquor is sold, con sumed or retained, home refrigerators included,” to discourage “inebriated rivalry.” By me, however, the most salient pro vision of his safety program would be the administering of “slur tests” to barflies. Under this section, “everyone who leaves a socially sanctioned intake facility” would be required to say: “The sixth sick sheik’s sixth sheep is sick.” Failure to achieve vocal clarity and proper enunciation “shall constitute a felony offense and an immediate arrest shall be made,” Loudermilk insists. I admire that recommendation, if for no other reason than its scientific authen ticity. Researchers long have recognized there is a direct correlation between driv ing an automobile, particularly in rush hour traffic, and reciting tonguetwisters. Both require steady nerves and a high degree of mental and muscular coordi nation, not to mention navigational skill, in order to reach a given destination. As a general rule, a commuter whose consonants run together during the re citation of “Peter Piper picked a peck of pickled peppers” is the commuter most likely to run over the curb and hit a mail box, or some unsuspecting pedestrian, on the way home. By the same token, a driver who stum bles over “she sells seashells by the seashore” is a pretty good bet to run into a ditch, or fail to stop in time to open the garage door after turning into the driveway. I salute Lowdermilk for his perspicac ity, and caution, and offer but one amendment to his program. Rather than station government “monitors” in joints where competitive drinking is apt to break out, I would assign umpires or re ferees. USPS 045 360 Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editor. DianaSultenf'uss Managing Editor Gary Barker Associate Editor Denise Richter City Editor Hope E. Paasch Assistant City Editor Beverly Hamilton Sports Editor John Wagner Entertainment Editor Colette Hutchings Assistant Entertainment Editor. . . . Diane Yount News Editors Daran Bishop, Brian Boyer, Jennifer Carr, Elaine Engstrom, Shelley Hoekstra, Johna Jo Maurer, Jan Werner, Rebeca Zimmermann Staff Writers Melissa Adair, Maureen Carmody, Frank Christlieb, Connie Edelmon, Patrice Koranek, John Lopez, Robert McGlohon, Ann Ramsbottom, Kim Schmidt, Patti Schwierzke, Kelley Smith, Angel Stokes, Tracey Taylor, Joe Tindel, Kathy Wiesepape Copyeditors JanSwaner, Chris Thayer Cartoonist Scott McCullar Graphic Artists Pam Starasinic Sergio Galvez Thompson, Fernando Andrade Photographers . David Fisher, Dena Brown, Eric Lee, Irene Mees, John Makely, William Schulz Editorial Policy //«■ liiiltnlion is a non-pintii. scli-su])iM>ninu ncus- p;ipcv operated as a commimin set \ ic e to I e\as .AX-A/ L'nivcrsils and lit \an-Collep;e Station. Opinions e\- ptessed in The Battalion arc those ot the editor or the author, and do not necessarih represent the opinions ol Texas A&M Unix ersity administrators or tai tilt i mem bers. or of the Board of Refrents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratory new spaper lot students in repot ting, editing and photograpln ( las ses within the Department of Connmmiealions. Questions or comments lont erning an\ editorial matter should he directed to the editor. Letters Policy Letters to the Editor should not exceed ADO words in length, and are subject to being cut il thev are longer. The editorial staff reserves the right to edit letters lor style and length, but will make every effort to maintain the author's intent. Each letter must also be signed and 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, 2 lb Reed McDonald. Texas AX.M I'ni- versitv. College Station. TX 77S4A. or phone (7 I A) 845- 2b I l. rite Battalion is published daily during Texas AXM's fall and spring semesters, except for holiday and exami nation periods. Mail subscriptions are $ l b.75 pet semes ter. $33.25 pet .school year and $35 per f till year. Adver tising rates furnished on request. Our address: The Battalion. 2lb 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. Reagan asserts compassion by Helen Thomas United Press International co “and my opponent went out and said said WASHINGTON — President Reagan takes most things in his stride. But he cannot stand it when he is accused of lacking compassion for the poor. And he doesn’t like it one bit when he is viewed as anti-environmentalist. As a Californian, that is hard for Reagan to swallow. In terms of his attitude toward the less fortunate, Reagan made it clear that those charges rub him the wrong way. In a recent speech he ticked off the pro jected budget outlays for food stamps and other social programs, and quipped “hard-hearted me.” He also feels he has been unfairly tag ged as one who does not believe in con servation and preserving the nation’s' natural resources. A recent poll did not give him high marks as a leader against the nation’s polluters, either. Nor has the controversy engulfing the Environmental Protection Agency and the investigations into the handling of the $1.6 billion “superfund” for toxic waste disposal helped the White House image as protectors of the public health. In remarks at Klamath Falls, Ore., where he toured a lumber mill and talked with industry representatives, Reagan said that in 1966, when he was running for governor of California, he addressed a forestry products group in San Francis- that I had said that if you’ve seen one tree, you’ve seen them all. “I never said any such thing,” Reagan said indignantly, having never been able to shake the effects of that quote. The subject came up when the indus try representatives asked him if he would consider vetoing new wilderness legisla tion “which would take millions of acres from our timber base.” Reagan said in the ’60s the “big wave” from the conservationists was for setting aside outdoor recreational land. ‘T hey were even foreclosing on some mining claims and they were buying up land and using eminent domain to do it,” he said, “claiming that it was needed for the f u ture so there would be outdoor recrea tional space. “Well, finally when they had ex hausted about all they could do with that, then came the environmental surge.” Reagan said the nation now has 80 million acres of wilderness land off limits for private development. “This is land that you cannot have a road in or any thing of the kind,” he said. “It’s there because out of 250 million Americans in this country, we realize that at least 240 million of them are backpackers who want to hike into that wilderness area.” Reagan’s joking remark about the astronomical number of backpackers drew a laugh from the lumbermen. The president said he realized that some areas "still should beprotl are so unique ... 1 mean inaddilij 80 million ... but let’s be reasom sensible about that. “And we intend to be. Andifi definite reason fiom an esthjM uniqueness of the land ... loajj wilderness, fine; but not logootl wholesale amounts that theyanl about because that wasn’t thet and the private sector has nod of rape of all the natural ret There is today in the liiitedSl much forest as there waswheid ton was at Valley Forge.” j White Mouse spokesman! Speakes said that Reagan watfl to the United States “belli Louisiana Purchase.” Reagan said that “there great effort spread over a nui years by the government to[ Mon ol moi e lainL and it now“fli third of all the i eal estate inthel States.” He said the bulk ofthegon owned land is in the West,“aniil used \at ious devices todoidT Reagan and the Sierra Cuba t onsei \atiouists li.ur been ail heads since he tame into has Interior Secretary James Wa up ilic ui 1 n u u isi i .itiun side,and! his full backing to Watt lorniorej lands to lie developed by pri dust rv. ETTA0I983 F 0 ** woRnt l-rPX-T&roeAi*— HULMtF B Tfl fRec 1- ' J sponsor /Saturday, Bed u let uminer. ■Theca pen to a fed by |the p; tc. a j /stance kite, s fction rules oniemat jThe e' ndersoi Conner ol Jdollemai Letters: Reagan and the circus Editor: Concerning Stephen Weiss’s “Political Seesaw” letter (March 9): Although Democratic Party criticism of Ronald Reagan’s policies strongly re semble a seesaw, Mr. Reagan’s views re semble less a seesaw and more a circus. While campaigning for the presidency in 1980, Reagan told us “The federal deficit provides the chief motive for the de bauching of our dollar.” The Reagan adminisitration now predicts a 1984 fed eral deficit of 145 billion dollars. Reagan had campaigned under the battle flag of laissez faire until he spoke to auto work ers at the Chrysler plant in Detroit two months before the election. He then appropriately concluded that the federal government’s spring of 1980 bail out of the Chrysler Corporation, a move which risked. 1.5 billion of the taxpayers’ dol lars, was the “proper answer.” In a December 17, 1981 press confer ence, Reagan said he was opposed to any tax increase, while his senior aides were quick to remind him that since Septem ber of that year he had been supporting a “revenue enhancement” measure. Reagan had sought election as an oppo nent to mandatory registration for the draft, but now supports the prosecution of non-registrants. When not reading from a script, Reagan’s act is even harder to follow. It woidd be “enlightening and informative” to see if Reagan still defends his positions that the progressive income tax is a “sys tem spawned by Karl Marx” or that the true basis for the New Deal was fascism. responsible and realistic attitude toward pre-marital sex. It does no good to try to deny its existence or to try to punish those who “do it.” Nor is it right for us to try to force our own moral judgements onto others. It is fine for others to try and persuade people to follow a certain moral code, but trying to limit teen-age sex by denying teen-agers easy access to con traceptives is ridiculous and detrimental to the long term good of society. anything connected with sexuiL^ fication. Pretty much the saniep PE don’t you agree? Lea Anderl In response to Ms. Stevens’ letter of March 3, I would like to say that her solution is ridiculous. She suggests that if you want to have sex, get married. Do you really feel that this is a rational solu tion? We already have a high divorce rate. Shall we increase that by having more marriages based on physical de sire? And what about teen-agers who get married in order to have sex. Ms. Stevens feels that a teen-ager’s parents should be informed when they get contraceptives. Will a married couple have to get their parent’s permission in order to get con traceptives? Why not just lock everyone into a chastity belt until their wedding vows are said. Parked car wrecki J r Editor: B * Help! Someone played destn derby with my silver ’80 Citation time between Feb. 25 and March6 parked in the Red lot behind La* Both the front and back doors driver’s side were hit while a car« ing out of their parking placed who has any information s’ please give me a call. To the person who did it: 1 real you may have panicked when you car and just didn’t know whai tod* is your chance to get rid of yi feelings. Thanks! Greg Rickard 4110 College Main Realistic attitudes Editor: I think it is about time we adopted a Furthermore, limiting the availability of contraceptives to teen-agers would not have the desired result of decreasing teen-age pregnancies. Rather, this would increase them. Teen-agers are not going to stop having sex because they can’t get contraceptives. They’re going to stop get ting contraceptives. This is not a new problem; sex before marriage has been around as long as marriage. The focus of this issue is how to decrease the number of teen-age pregnancies. Surely a more responsible and realistic attitude would be for teen-agers to accept the responsibilities that go along with sex — this includes preventing any “acci dents,” or “punishments,” as you would like to call them. Oh, and by the way, sex and lust do mean kind of the same thing. I looked it up in Webster’s just in case I was mis taken. Lust — strong sexual desire; Sex Gena Kirkf 26f Stereo stolen Editor: Dear Aggies: Did any good Ags see a theft inP 61 between Saturday, March : Wednesday, March 9? My yellot GT was broken into and the car was stolen. The car looks likes corvette. It was parked in the first the northwest corner undernea 1 light. A $100 reward is being gi'j information leading to the arH conviction of the guilty party. App : IV Gregor ?