Page 2/The Battalion/Tuesday, January 29, 1985
Students should pay
more for education
Texas A&M University officials are worried. The monetary
screws are being tightened, and it spells trouble for many pro
grams within the A&M system.
The 69th Regular Session of the Texas State Legislature has
begun, and the important item of discussion is how to make up a
$ 1 oillion shortfall in state revenues.
State educational agencies, A&M included, have been told to
prepare for cuts that could slice each school’s total budget by as
much as 20 percent.
The chances of a 20 percent cut being made are slim, but
there are still substantial cuts to be made.
In light of the inevitable budget cuts that the University
faces, it is unrealistic for the University to hang on to the notion
that tuition here should not be raised.
The Battalion Editorial Board has to question the validity of
a pay system that requires in-state students to pay just $4 per
credit hour at A&M. The plain fact is that we are not paying our
way.
Tuition in Texas has not been raised since 1957 — despite
the fivefold increase in the amount the state spends per student
— enabling the state to have the lowest tuition costs in the na
tion.
The Legislative Study Group, a division of the A&M student
g overnment, has lobbied on behalf of students that there should
e no tuition increases.
An admirable idea. But is it realistic? Even when you include
all the outside fees that Aggies pay on top of their tuition, the
number still puts A&M as one of the cheapest institutions in the
nation.
Students in Texas should pay higher tuition, as long as their
money goes back into their schools, back into improving their
education.
The tuition hikes as proposed now would simply take the ad
ditional money and put it back into the state treasury, to be di
vided among the state agencies. But that doesn’t do the schools
any good, and the deficit is not the fault of the schools or the stu
dents.
Representative Wilhelmina Delco has introduced a bill to the
Texas Legislature that would gradually raise tuition over the
next ten years by 600 percent but woula put most of the money
back into the schools. Under her bill, the tuition money that now
goes straight into the state treasury would still go there, but the
additional money made from the tuition hikes would go back
into the schools.
Under Delco’s plan, Texas would still remain in the bottom
10 states as far as tuition costs.
It is not unreasonable to expect students in Texas to pay
more for their education, but it does seem unreasonable to make
students pay higher tuition costs if that money doesn’t improve
their education. Students should be paying for their education,
not making up for the state’s deficit.
The Battalion Editorial Board
LETTERS:
Glad to have the
freedom to choose
EDITOR:
Ed like to commend the Battalion Ed
itorial Board for its strongly stated affir
mation of the right of women to decide
for or against having an abortion with
out governmental interference.
I’ve been a wife for over 17 years and
a mother for nearly 14, and through the
years I’ve faced a great many problems.
Women in our society, whether or not
they have careers, still bear the major
responsibility for nurturing their fami
lies, and I’m no exception. In order to
carry out these often enormous respon
sibilities, I’ve counted on having as
many options as possible to deal with
crises as they arise. One of those options
is the right to choose abortion, an option
I’ve never had to use. But I’m glad to
have the right.
Anti-abortion activists tell women
(who historically have been expected to
place their own needs and opinions sec
ond) that the life of a six-weeks embryo
must by law take precedence over every
other consideration in her life. They say
this embryo is a “child” and a “person”
as much as, say, my 13 year-old is, and
fully formed, which is scientifically in
correct. They suggest that 15 million
women in this country are murderers,
when, in fact, they are 15 million
women who, for 15 million different
reasons, decided that abortion was the
right thing to do in a difficult, often
devastating situation. Their individual
decisions are none of my business, nor
are they the business of anti-abortion ac
tivists — and certainly none of the gov
ernment’s.
The number of abortions that have
been performed since 1973 is often
compared to the Nazi Holocaust. Only if
the government were forcing women
into abortions, as the Chinese govern
ment’s one-child-per-family policy is,
would it be even slightly comparable to
the Holocaust. I think it’s instructive
that Romania’s President Ceausescu
wants his countrywomen to have more
babies and now has a network of spies, I
read, to report women who have abor
tions. In both Communist China and
Communist Romania, women aren’t
free to choose, as they are in this coun
try. Let’s keep America free.
Kristin Parsons
College Station
Right to lifers’
rights count, too
EDITOR:
The Supreme Court in the Roe v.
Wade case legalized abortion. This deci
sion, in my opinion, was made in re
sponse to the “back-alley” abortion.
In this regard I would have to agree
with the Supreme Court decision. The
Supreme Court also affirmed the right
of a mother to have a “choice” regard
ing her pregnancy.
However, one has to ask what about
the rights of the pro-life groups? These
people regard abortion as a life or death
issue. Are their rights being respected?
Specifically I would like to point out
the use of federal money in paying for
abortions. This money is collected from
all taxpayers. To me this is the most dis
turbing area in the abortion question.
Why is federal money being used to
pay for abortions when a very signifi
cant proportion of the U.S. population
is sincerely opposed to abortions? What
choices do these people have — stop
paying taxes or bomb abortion clinics?
The Founding Fathers spoke of the
“tyranny of the majority.” Therefore I
propose that the right to have an abor
tion never be made illegal but also to
end all federal funding for abortions.
Then I could live knowing that I’m
not paying for abortions and as a Chris
tian I could pray for the souls for any
body responsible for an abortion.
Stephan A. Y’Barbo
Class of’83
LSG lobbied against tuition hikes in past
LSG lobbying for students
, AS m u OS in°u r )U Reader’s Forum
know, the 69th Reg- Reader’s Forum
ular Session of the Reader's Forum
Texas State Legis- 1 '
lature began earlier this month, and the
students of Texas A&M University are
being represented. The Legislative
Study Group (LSG), which is part of
Student Government at TAMU, is re
sponsible for speaking on behalf of the
students on issues of higher education.
LSG was there to help defeat the ef
forts to raise tuition twice in the past.
LSG was there to explain how raising
the drinking age to 21 would hurt area
businesses as well as the effects it would
have on college students. LSG played a
major part in protecting the Permanent
University Fund (PUF) by encouraging
everyone to vote for Proposition 2 dur
ing the November election, and once
again we will be there to represent you,
the students.
The major concern of this session is
money; and, due to the increase in oil
revenues, the state is faced with a $1 bil
lion shortfall. This has led _ the legis
lators to look into different ways of ei
ther raising revenues, trimming the
budget, or a combination of both.
One area that legislators feel could
offer a possible solution is that of higher
education. State officials have informed
all agencies, including colleges and uni
versities, to look into ways of trimming
their budgets. But this method only lim
its expenditures. 1 he legislators must
still look for ways of raising revenue,
and the college student seems to be the
prime target.'
The $4.00 per semester hour which
an in-state college student pays in tu
ition covers approximately 3.5% of the
cost to educate that student. Tuition in
Texas has not been raised since 1957;
and, consequently, this has enabled
Texas to be ranked 50th in the nation
with the lowest cost to in-state students.
This is the “side of the coin” which
most legislators and the misinformed
public view as the issue of tuition. Now,
let us both look at the other side of the
coin.
All of the above figures are correct,
but they are not complete. With the ex
ception of college students, theii par
ents, and the people who work foi the
universities, John Q. Public does not re
alize that this is not the entire picture.
When one takes into account the fees
(Building Use Fees, Student Center
Complex Fee, Laboratory Fee, P.F.
Fees, etc.), one now realizes that we ac
tually pay approximately 13% of the
cost of our education.
Now some may think that this is still
too low. Let us remember that the
Founding Fathers of Texas knew that
education was very important toi 1
well-being of this state. They feint •
the ability of one to attend col
should not be hindered on the basis
money, but more importantly tm4 I
intelligence and their willingness P
learn. 1 his is why they meant lor edn 1
lion to be inexpensive, so that eveno
should have that opportunity to expn
their knowledge. For they knewtbaii
ery person who went on tobetteribe v
selves would also benefit the state
well.
Many bills will be introduced thisj
sion to raise tuition. LSG hasappoi®
Chris Gavras as the Tuition Coortfc
tor. He will be responsible foryesean 1
ing the effects of these bills on thei
lege student.
The Legislative Study Grouphas;
taken an official stance on tuition;! 1
until we present our research to theS
dent Senate for final approval,;we |
continue to insure that collegestudt i
at TAMU are being representedi I
that the issue of tuition is being con I
ered with all aspects included.
If you have an opinion concern
this issue or any others, please feel! |
to contact me at the Student Con ’
ment Of fice in the Pavilion, or call
3051.
Johnny Hatch is a junior politidi
ence major and director of the Lit
lative Study Group.
Abortion editorial
didn’t show all sides
EDITOR:
Battalion Editorial Board:
Even though an editorial board’s
opinion is just an opinion, a lot of peo
ple respect its views and believe what is
printed to be the whole truth. It is too
bad that someone in your position can
give a view on a subject and say that the
personal feelings have been put aside.
If your job is to let people know what
is going on, then let them know all of
the subject and not a one-sided personal
view.
In your editorial on abortion entitled
“FREEDOM TO CHOOSE MUST
NOT BE DENIED,” a major part of the
issue was left out. Since the personal
feelings were not there, why did the ar
ticle seem so biased? What about the
child? Is the idea behind pro-choice in
tended to keep “the government from
intruding in its citizens personal lives”
or just the mother’s life? Why do you ig
nore the other half of this subject as if
they are non-existent? Everyone,
mother AND child, should be allowed to
have a choice.
I offer no solution to this problem.
Just remember who all is involved when
discussing the issue. Do not leave some
one out when they cannot voice their
own ideas or fit into your personal view.
With opinions like yours, it is easy to
see why a woman might take the simple
way out, without even considering the
baby. She possibly would feel obligated
to have an abortion in order to keep the
federal government in line.
Your editorial was signed the “THE
BATTALION EDITORIAL BOARD,”
does the whole board have the same
narrow view and writing style?
Mark Gatewood
Battalion Ed Board
for ‘liberal stupid causes’
EDITOR:
The Battalion’s pro-abortion editorial
on Jan. 23 is just one of a series of over
whelmingly liberal articles that shows
once more that this paper has forfeited
any claims for objective coverage. It be
came rather a cheap liberal propaganda
piece. I don’t agree with the argument
that anti-abortion legislation would in
terfere with citizen’s private lives. On
the other hand, I believe that such gov
ernmental programs as affirmative ac
tion and taxation for funding of welfare
is an imposition on individual freedom.
Charity should not be made compul
sory. (Incidentally, statistics shows that
social programs cut initiated in the last
few years resulted in decrease of crime
rate. This is to a large extent due to the
fact that the cut off of welfare provided
an incentive for productive activity
which diverted the previously unem
ployed people from crime and drugs.)
The argument that the unborn babies
are not human seem to me similar to
the Nazi theory of superior and inferior
races. Could we really condemn bomb
ings of Nazi concentration camps if this
could prevent the murder of millions of
people? It would be just as wrong to
condemn the abortion clinics bombings
which had the purpose of saving lives of
innocent babies. It is amazing that the
same groups that sponsored 15 million
mass murder in America and advocate a
continuous torturous experiment on an
imals in the name of science, have a
nerve to self-righteously demonstrate
against South African apartheid policy
for various other liberal stupid causes.
Do advocates of free murder have a
right tojudge others?
Leon Luxemburg
Electrical Engineering grad student
Editor’s Note: The Ed Board on Jan. 23
was pro-choice, not pro-abortion.
There is a big difference — which was
the point of the editorial.
It is also an opinion, not a news arti
cle, and as such does not claim to be ob
jective or unbiased.
The Battalion
USPS 045 360
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Brigid Brockman, Editor
Shelley Hoekstra, Managing Editor
Ed Cassavoy, City Editor
Kellie Dworaczyk, News Editor
Michelle Powe, Editorial Page Editor
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
The Battalion Staff
Assistant City Editors -
Kari Eluegel, RhondaSnido
Assistant News Editors
Tammy Bell. Cami Brown, John Hall®
Assistant Sports Editor -
Charean Willia®
Entertainment Editors
Shawn Behlen, Leigh-EllenCW
Staff Writers Cathie Anderson
Brandon Berry, Dainah Btilbnl
Ann Cervenka, Tony Cornet
Michael Crawford, Kirsten Diet!
Patti Flint, Patrice Korand
Trent Leopold, Sarah Oates
J erry Oslin, Tricia Parkei
Lynn RaePove
Copy Editor Kay Mallei
Make-up Editors KarenBlodi
Karla Marti
Columnists Kevin Inda, LorenSteff
Editorial Cartoonist Mike Lao
Sports Cartoonist DaleSmit
Copy Writer CathyBennet
Photo Editor Katherine Hon
Photographers Anthony Casper
Wayne Grabein, Frank In*
John Makely, Peter Rocha, Dean Sail®
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-supporting nempip
operated as a community service to Texas A&M ^
Bryan-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of ^
Editorial Board or the author, and do not ncccssurihrf
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators,taM
or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaperl#
students in reporting, editing and photographydis#
within the Department of Communications.
Letters Policy
Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 nvrdi^
length. The cditorutl staff reserves the right tv edit lette 1
for style and length but will make every effort to
the author's intent. Each letter must he signed and Hid
include the add, ess and telephone number of the mitt
The Battalion is published Monday through fry
during Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holuln
and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are (l(i>
per semester, $33.25 per school year and f.liperid
year. Advertising rates furnished on request.
Our address: I he Battalion, 216 Reed McDmd
Building. I'exas A&M University, College Stathi, ft
77313. Editorial staff phone number: (409) S45-2fddAi
vertising: (400) 345-2011.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX770
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to ihc li:.r
ion, I'exas A&M University, College Station. Ttti
77343
*