Page 2/The Battalion/Monday, March 31, 1986
Have a seat
Student elections at Texas A&M never have attracted much
participation or even notice from the students. But this year stu
dent apathy has spread to those who run for office as well as
those who vote. If the current trend continues. Student Govern
ment may degenerate into a handful of people serving their re
sumes rather than the student body.
Last year 4,324 students voted, and pnly 1,799 cast ballots in
the runoff for student body president. This year voter turnout
seems to be the least of Student Government’s worries. Not only
are students ignoring the polls, they’re disregarding vacancies
on the ballot as well.
Thirty-five Student Senate seats have not been filed for.
Only six seats out of 77 are being contested. The class councils,
too, are struck by student apathy. Three of five seats for the
Class of ’89 are uncontested as are all five for the Class of ’88
and four of five for the Class of ’87.
This is a significant increase from the, almost 20 unfiled Sen
ate seats last year. The vacancies can be filled in the fall, if
enough concerned students decide to'apply. Then the Internal
Affairs Committee selects the best applicants for each vacant po
sition.
Burle
he bod;
[ut of
norniti]
Richa
wildlife
1 or fror
n a bo:
b.m. ’ll
Burk
Iff Joe
[itting ii
ind lost
:ircle ai
ikier.
Beck
ucked
read b
propelli
lies;
;or the
Wtstof
The
iay mi
recover
This procedure fills the empty seats, but it doesn’t give the
students a chance to choose their representatives. Uncontested
races also may fail to provide accurate representation. Students
frequently complain that Student Government doesn’t do any
thing for students, but now students aren’t doing anything for
Student Government either.
about
Reporting on proof, not rumors
Covn
ruled a;
The cycle continues to spiral downward. The only way to
stop the plunge is for the potential of Student Government to be
realized, which can’t happen if no one runs for office.
The Battalion Editorial Board
I know a sen
ator who’s a wom
anizer. I know at
least four who are
drunks. I know a
governor who
beats his wife and
I know several
that he is now or ever has heen a homo
sexual. Journalism has had prouder mo
ments.
about hypocrisy — character, again,
suppose. For still others, it wouldsimpii
AUST
Mail Call
Incessant bickering
EDITOR:
It really bugs me that there is all this incessant and petty bickering
between the Corps of Cadets and the non-uniformed students (I hate the
term non-regs). There should not be any difference between the two factions.
What a person wears, be it a uniform or other organizational regalia, should
not extract them from the rest of the University. Texas A&M itself is the
organization we all belong to and represent. Sure the Corps was here first,
but the Indians can tell you it doesn’t mean a thing.
Why is the Corps singled out in many Battalion articles? We get more
frontal assaults on us than anyone else, including the GSS. Is it because we
have a lot of jerks in the Corps? Sure we have our share of them, but so does
every other organization. No organization is made up of Albert Schweitzers,
so we all have our faults. It must be the uniforms. You see us in them
everyday; it makes us more visible.
Let me tell you by personal experience that it is no fun to be singled out
because of a uniform. I went through this attitude for five years, both at
home and abroad, while serving in the Navy. All I am asking is to not judge
the many by the actions of the few. So lets give each other a break and drop
these barriers between us. I mean, look at it this way. If we all got along real
well, The Battalion may go out of business.
Devan Breedlove
Class of’88
Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in length.. 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 he signed and must include the address and telephone number of the writer.
politicians — not
to mention admin
istration officials
— who are gay.
Richard
^Cohejj^
Would you like to know their names
Well, I’m not going to tell you. In the
first place. I’m not so sure it’s any of
your business. And in the second place
— and more to the point — I really
don’t “know” the things I think I know.
I merely have heard rumors. Washing
ton, after all, is a company town.
The rumor about Kemp stems from
an incident that occurred during Ron
ald Reagan’s first term as California
governor. Kemp, a young GOP zealot
(he is now an older zealot) and quar
terback of the Buffalo Bills, was a part-
time Reagan aide and the co-owner of a
vacation lodge. The other owner of the
lodge, another Reagan aide, used the
lodge for homosexual parties. There
has never been any evidence that the
lodge was anything other than what
Kemp said it was — a real-estate invest
ment he never even visited. Neverthe
less, the rumor persists.
raise questions. What does it meanPAtammem
ter all, when it comes to sex, it’s hard (April 21
say what matters. John Kennedy aw c ‘ nt0 B
pears to have been a womanizer, buti[il u ' tane(
» ■exas cit
not clear that it affected his presidenol y‘j ewt , (
Richard Nixon, on the other hand,ajJorks w j
pears to have never cheated on hiswiitlar Stat
— just the American people. lepartm
Helebrati
ii - if * .l r . I It is e
But in Kemp s case, the tact remain!^ ,
that there is no proof that he is anytliii;l l n ^
other than a reel-blooded American tali, Cor|
erosexual — a husband and fatherdltso, Loi
four children and a tax bill. All theresl G ar y 1
is rumor
the
■alii', sai
But for some reason, the rules have
been suspended for Rep. Jack Kemp (R-
N.Y.). At least three times, recently he
has been asked whether he has ever
been a homosexual or had a homosex
ual experience. Newsweek has posed
the question. Vanity Fair, too. And just
recently, the question was put to Kemp
on the “Today” show where he was
asked to “categorically” deny that he
had ever had a homosexual experience.
He did so — “categorically.”
For any politician, a rumor of homo
sexuality would be both troubling and
damaging. But for Kemp, it could be
curtains. His core constituency includes
the pathologically conservative. For
most Americans, homosexuality re
mains a taboo, but for Kemp’s people —
their intolerance fanned by a gaggle of
Bible-thumping bigots — it represents a
kind of sexual communism. It’s beyond
the pale, beyond comprehension and, of
course, beyond tolerance. Maybe Kemp
is learning the hard'way the price of in
tolerance.
same sort of rumor L._ .
says senator so and so is a drunk, thaiil^^
certain governor beats his wifeorthaiil^gu^
member of the Reagan adininsiraiioesl More
gay. Merely to ask the question ii/oBexassi
spread the rumor. The “Todav'sta l
interviewer, for instance, knew fail
well what Kemp’s answer would beanAi
would have fallen out of her chair if
Kemp had answered in the affirmatnd
She could just as well have asked himil
he beat his w-ife.
Each time Kemp says no. No — he is
not a homosexual. No — he has not had
a homosexual experience. Each time, in
effect, he has been forced to respond to
a rumor for which there is no proof —
not even an accuser. All by himself,
Kemp has become victim of a new kind
of journalistic excess — sexual McCarth-
yism. In a manner reminiscent of the
late Joe McCarthy, he is asked to deny
If there were any proof that Kemp is
a homosexual, bisexual or once had
been any of those things, then maybe it
would be worth reporting— maybe. For
some people, it would raise serious ques
tions of character and they would look
elsewhere for a candidate to support.
(George Bush, can you categorically
deny that, even once, even at camp . . .?)
For others, it would raise questions
The rules of journalism — if you®
cede there are such things — arechanj
ing. The While House press corps tin
looked the other way for John KenneAi
would not similarly oblige a presidci
nowadays. That’s good. It is theoblip
tion of the press to give the public ik
facts so it can make its own decisioisl
about character. But the key word
facts — not rumors. A lot has changei
in journalism, but there is onestandaiA
still worth keeping: If you have
proof, write it. 1 f not, shut up.
Richard Cohen is a columnist for lk
Washington Post Writers Group.
%
Welfare another nail in the coffin of the pool
We’re in a mess
right now, and if
we don’t change
our tune in a
hurry more peo
ple will suffer. No,
I don’t mean Nica
ragua or Libya,
but the plight of
America’s black
youth mired in the
ghettos of our cit
ies’ backyards.
Let’s take the average black male
teen-ager. He has a 50-50 chance of
growing up without a father and most
likely he’s numbered among the jobless.
If he takes a quick look out his window,
he’ll probably see drug pushers, prosti
tutes, permanently unemployed and
kids skipping school to dribble basket
balls, chasing their dream of escape.
He then closes his window to quiet the
baby crying in a back room, who has a
44 percent chance of depending on an
unwed mother and a 25 percent chance
that mom is a teen-ager.
Since she’s at home, she tells the
young man at the window not to worry;
she’s caring for the child. She has prag
matically reasoned that she’s better off
financially not working a minimum-
wage job earning $535 a month when
she can collect at least $380 from wel
fare, $110 from food stamps and be
tween $100 and $200 in rental subsidies
on government housing. She can draw
from 17 different federal programs,
and she’s even encouraged to overlap
her benefits from Aid to Families with
Dependent Children, welfare and Social
Security.
As a 16-year-old high school dropout,
she’s not a welfare cheat. She’s but one
of thousands of black women in poverty
who are hanging on to short-term secu
rity from the federal government. By
remaining single and jobless, she can
collect more money plus care for her
baby. But she’ll probably have more ba
bies, collect more handouts and further
the current trends that point to the year
2000 recording 70 percent of black chil
dren being born out of wedlock.
Her oldest son will turn 16 and try to
find a job. But what employer will hire
him when minimum wage stands at
$,3.35 an hour, topped by Social Security
and taxes that make all American work
ers worth at least $4 an hour? As an
unskilled teen-ager, he just won’t cut the
mustard in today’s economy where
more than 1.1 million black males are
unemployed or are no longer looking
for jobs.
He may receive a high school di
ploma, but it’s worthless since the fed
eral government’s pushed his public
school more to graduate him than to
teach him. Whether he’s 15 or 50, if he
can’t find a job, there’s always the bro
ken life of the streets. Crime is just one
step away. Of the 462,442 people in fed
eral or state prisons in 1984, 46 percent
were blacks, although blacks are just
12.1 percent of the U.S. population.
We have been digging deeper graves
for America’s poor with each federal
dollar we hand out — latest count, $ 11
billion distributed annually in welfare
programs alone.
In his book Losing Ground, social sci
entist Charles Murray notes that
throughout the ’70s we knew that the
ghetto was growing, but we blamed ra
cial prejudice and the system for the
blacks’ sad state. We just pumped more
money in and turned our heads.
On the other hand, from 1950 to
1968, government aid was a trickle and
poverty rates dropped, with only free
enterprise’s incentives to push them
down.
It wasn’t until the federal govern
ment took it upon itself to fine tune the
economy and end poverty that the
events took a drastic change for the
worse. Although some prosperous
breezes intermittently boosted the U.S.
economy in the ’70s, those who de
pended on welfare never felt a whiff.
It’s a case of misplaced incentives,
Murray says. When social workers real
ized that drawing welfare drew degra
dation along with it, they worked to end
the the stigma. Consequently, a welfare
check became a right instead of a short
term crutch. Mommas stopped eyebal
ling their sons with stern reminders like
“If you don’t work, you don’t eat,” and
started saying “If they’re handing it out,
you may as well get your share.”
We have refused to treat the black
poor as individual Americans, responsi
ble for their personal successes and fail
ures. White guilt over past injustice has
resulted in an even greater injustice that
makes the climb out of the ghetto almost
impossible.
“If I were poor or handicapped in
this country, I would beg government
not to help me,” says Dr. Walter E. Wil
liams, a black economist at George Ma
son University. He adds that we are a
nation of immigrants —Jews, Poles, Ir
ish, Italians, Japanese, Chinese — who
came here poor, uneducated and knew
the pain of prejudice. But they fit into
society’s mainstream without govern
ment programs. Blacks and Hispanics
have received the largest amount gov-
wrnment aid, and they remain per
sistently in poverty, he says.
The problem doesn’t evaporate when
the minority group extends itself to the
middle class. Murray states that in an ef
fort to create equal outcome instead of
equal opportunity, the government sad
dles some of the black middle class with
higher salaries at first. In the long run,
these blacks often receive lower salaries
because they bypassed some of the
training foundation that most get.
While the middle class loses its taxes,
the impoverished are losing their jobs,
their families, their education, their per
sonal safety and their self respect.
Charity definitely has its place. As the
people responsible for 80 percent of all
giving in the world, Americans can best
handle the needy through private funds
at the local level.
The Houston Chronicle reported
that the city’s financial crunch will prob
ably force a cutback in social services.
Mayor Kathy Whitmire told the city
council that property taxes just couldn’t
be raised any higher. Wouldn’t it be bet
ter if we cut back gradually on a national
level before there is no other alterna
tive?
Benjamin Franklin learned that les
son over 200 years ago. He wrote a
friend:
“I have long been of your opinioi
that your legal provision forthepoorji
England) is a very great evil. We ha«
followed your example, and begin no*
to see our error, and I hope, shall K
form it.”
Cynthia Gay is a junior journalism 0
jor and a columnist for The Battalion.
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
The Battalion Editorial Board
Michelle Powe, Editor
Kay Mallett, Managing Editor
Loren Steffy, Opinion Page Editor
Jerry Oslin, City Editor
Cathie Anderson, News Editors
Travis Tingle, Sports Editor
Editorial Policy
77ie Battalion is a tton-ptofit, self-supportingnenspi-
per operated as a community service to Texas A&Mw
Bryan-College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of iht
Editorial Board or the author, and do not necessarilyrtp
resent the opinions of Texas A&M administrators, facuh)
or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaperfot
students in reporting, editing and photography clastf
within the Department of Communications.
United Press International is entitled exclusively toll*
use for reproduction ol all news dispatches credited toil
Rights of reproduction of all other matter herein re
served.
The Battalion is published Monday through Frith'
during Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiih'
and examination periods. Mail subscriptions are SI6"
per semester, $33.25 per school year and $35 per M
year. Advertising rates furnished on request.
Our address: The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonM
Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, T\
77843.
Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77813
POSTMAS TER: Send address changes to The Bad
ion, 216 Reed McDonald, Texas A&M University, Colltgt
Station TX 77843.