Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 18, 1986)
Page 2rThe Battalion/Friday, April 18, 1986 Million dollar boo boo Gov. Mark White thought he was rescuing the state from the rising tide of financial shortfall when he ordered 13 percent budget cuts for higher education. But the governor’s life-pre server policy floats as well as a brick. White planned to save us from an anticipated $1.3 billion dollar shortfall in state revenue created by the recent decline of oil prices. But his budget-cutting remedy is in for some unex pected cuts itself. The governor’s plan ran into its first snag when Texas A&M announced it would cut only 7 percent from next year’s budget. Now White’s staff has discovered community colleges are exempt from executive and legislative orders. White assumed'that community colleges were under state ju risdiction because they receive 65 percent of their funding from the state. But community colleges are considered local agencies that are controlled by local governing boards — not the State Legislature. Neither state universities nor community colleges have to conform to White’s executive order. But while the Legis lature can mandate a budget cut for state schools, community colleges are exempt. The governor’s shortsightedness means a $115 million shortfall in his plan to rescue the state from the revenue short fall. It’s ridiculous that White didn’t research his shortfall pro tection plan more thoroughly before submitting the state’s uni versities and colleges to the budget ax. Before the governor pulls out his scissors, he should know whereof he cuts. The Battalion Editorial Board No startling secrets in Stockman’s book A short quiz. Who wrote the fol lowing? “I was appalled by the false prom ises of the 1984 campaign. Ronald Reagan had been induced by his ad visers and his own Richord illusions to em- Cohen brace one of the more irresponsible platforms of mod ern times. He had promised, as it were, to alter the laws of arithmetic . . . After four years in of fice, the Reaganites had no more sense that governance involved facing facts and making palatable choices than they had at the beginning.” (a) Walter Mondale in his book, Where’s the Beef? (b) Tip O’Neill in an offhand remark to his caddy (c) Gary Hart in his book, My Favorite New Jer sey Jokes (d) Jesse Jackson in his book, If I Can Make It Rhyme, I Can Make It Shine, or (e) David Stockman in The Triumph of Politics. Logic says that the correct answer is anything but (e). After all, Stockman is the self-styled conservative ideologue, the man the Washington Post described in a headline as “zealot.” That man would not have waited until now to have written such a statement. In all good conscience, he would have spoken out during the campaign itself. He would have told the American people that he — a Reagan administration insider — knew the president was spouting hog- wash. But, alas, it is Stockman who now con fesses that he was, by his own characteri zation, the Albert Speer of the Reagan administration — the technocrat who knew better. There he was, surrounded by dummies, PR men and bootlickers who served a president who only dimly understood his own economic program, and he said nothing. Aside from his pe- The Battalion (USPS 045 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conferehce The Battalion Editorial Board Michelle Powe, Editor Kay Mallett, Managing Editor Loren Steffy, Opinion Page Editor Jerry Oslin, City Editor Cathie Anderson, News Editor Travis Tingle, Spot ts Editor Editorial Policy 1 he Buitulion is u non-profit, self-supporting newspa per operated as a community service to 7 exas ASc.M and Br\an-College Station. Opinions expressed in The Battalion are those of the Editorial Board or the author, and do not necessarily rep resent the opinions of Texas AXr.M administrators, faculty or the Board of Regents. The Battalion also serves as a laboratory newspaper for students in reporting, editing and photography classes within the Department of Communications. L Uited 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 re served. The Battalion is published Monday through Friday dur ing Texas A&M regular semesters, except for holiday and examination periods. .Mail subscriptions are $ 10.75 per se mester. $30.25 per school year and $35 per full year. Ad vertising lutes furnished on request. Our address: 'The Battalion. 216 Reed .McDonald Building. Texas ASc.M University. College Station. 1X 77843. Second class postage paid at College Station. TX 77843. POS'TMASTER: Send address changes to The Battal ion. 210 Reed McDonald. Texas ASL\M University, College Station TX 77843. riodic indiscretions to William Greider, pulbished in Atlantic Monthly, for which he was sent to the woodshed, Stockman clammed up. The 1984 elec tion came and went with nary a word from the the man. He had other obliga tions. He was writing a $2.3 million book. What is the obligation of the public man? Should Stockman have resigned for policy, rather than personal, reasons and made his differences clear? Did he have a responsibility to a public that in -1984 was going about the dismal busi ness of choosing a president? After all, he couches his policy differences with the Reagan administration in gravest terms: “If we stay the course we are now on, the decade will end with a worse hy perinflation than the one with which it began.” To Stockman, at least, this is no trivial matter. The trouble with asking about the ob ligation of the public man is that the question is posed in a vacuum. In Stock man’s case, the answer is complicated by money. In other words, the question be comes something like, “Should I enter the debate now (probably to no avail) or should I keep my mouth shut and put it all in a book?” The $2.3 million answer will be in bookstores by the end of the month. In some sense, the money Stockman received for his book represents a kind of bribe. Of course, we don’t see it that way — and that word would never be used to describe a book advance. But what is it, if as seems to be the case it in duces a public official to serve himself first, a publisher second and the, last, the public that paid his government sal ary? In other words, would Stockman have kept mum all this time if there had been no book contract? Only Stockman can provide that an swer. And it may not be fair to come down top hard on him. After all, it was his candor that got him into trouble in the first place (and probably accounts for his whopping book advance). But Stockman personifies what money is doing in Washington, how the very sound of vast amounts of it washing around gets the attention of most gov ernment officials — and not a few jour nalists. Government service, like grad uate school, is seen as a rite of passage — something you do before making lots of money. Prudence says you keep one eye on a potential employer while, with the other, you do the public’s business. In Stockman’s case it means holding your indignation until it can be sold. In the end, Stockman’s book will amount to nothing. We already know' Reagan is disengaged, that he is allergic to facts, in love with anecdotes and, by afternoon, in need of a nap. Indeed, Stockman comes across as yet another Reagan child, petulantly trying to get the old man’s attention by hurting him just a bit. But Stockman has hurt him self instead. He wrote a book that’s al ready been written. It’s called “Looking Out For Number One.” Richard Cohen is a columnist for the Washington Post Writers Group. Opinion Wet-c not the N.R.A We just happened to be our lives m peace when we were sltot bj nuts mi criminals who were able to easily bu^^uns. | Hmt s all we wanted to Th ! Gabri ■MM ■ ■ M m ■ ■ i V OdUl 1 The price of tough-guy imagsp President Rea gan says that by b o m b i n g Libya and demonstrat ing that we will re spond to violence with more vio lence, the United States has raised the price of terror- i s m . U n f o r t u - nately, the United jH*? Si Michelle Powe States also has raised the probability of more terrorist attacks against Ameri cans. The air attack on Libya won’t stop terrorism — Libyan or otherwise. All it has accomplished is uniting Arab na tions with Khadafy against the United States; straining U.S. relations with other nations, including the Soviet bloc; killing innocent people; and sustaining U.S. casualties. Tw'o U.S. pilots are miss ing after the air attack and presumed dead. Is the likely loss of these pilots, the cancelation of a meeting next month be tween the Soviet foreign minister and President Reagan and worldwide con demnation worth the price of relieving Reagan’s trigger finger? There is no doubt that Moammar Khadafy is a madman and a threat to world security. He must be stopped or contained somehow. But when we use his own tactics against him, are we any better than he? The United States has attacked a city and killed innocent civil ians. Our bombs took a 15-month-old baby’s life. I guess that makes us one- for-one with the terrorists now. Even if the injured and killed people were bombed accidentally by us, we are still responsible. Even if all the damage caused to our non-targets, including the French embassy, actually was caused by Libyan anti-aircraft missiles (which is doubtful), we are still responsible be cause the Libyans were trying to protect themselves from our attack. But what is the real message we have sent to terrorists? Have we shown them that the United States will not tolerate any more anti-American aggression? No. We don’t respond to terrorist acts unless we know we can win. Reagan did nothing when 248 ma rines were killed in Lebanon in 1983. He did nothing when an American sol dier was shot and killed by a Soviet sen try in East Germany is 1985. Lebanon, Iran and Syria all are ha vens for terrorists. Most experts believe that Iran and Syria are much more re sponsible for terrorism than Libya. But their ties with the Soviet Union make them hands-off to the United States. A confrontation with one of these nations might lead to a showdown with the So viet Union. So instead the United States picks on the little guys. Instead of sending a tough message to terrorists inclined to attack Americans, the United States has to By sent quite a different message cowardly enemies: Besuretoal self strongly with the Soviet Unioi the United States will leave you all If Reagan is going to esiii strong anti-terrorism policy, htH make sure that policy is cons The wor must make ii < Ir.u !<> .ill terroiil^Js s< >i 111c; ii.tt n ms ih.it the lHitedSuB? 016 * 1 i esp< m<I to .ill .k is i>1 lerrorisaiB 1 fj* 1 j,-. si iiim not just w lien it sumvennM 11 Reagan also m fnaerous , ‘Herons, countrv lie represents is the i, a febi teS . States — a country which is supp«fact, ; value the sanctity of human 1 tported ii man lilt We .tlilu>i tetrnrismlxa^Vious : iis tnw.udue ,iiul senselessnejHoccur mostly because its victims usual® ikh cut b\ slanders. Yet whohatt® 1011 s ‘ tacked? Innocent people. Peopsl did nothing to justify homes bombed. of Mnisl'fiv gnmon. I error ism is a worldwide piHany ti which will require the nation® world banding together to erj problem. Reagan, by his actiot week, has further destabilized ready unstable situation. He more distance and more animo: tween the nations of the wii made a bad problem worse. How many bombs will havt| dropped before Reagan rets tel my-day attitude out of hissysttiB we start making real progress: world peace? Michelle Powe is a senior join major and editor for The Battalie Mail Call Obvious liberal bias? One for the Gipper EDITOR: I am becoming more and more convinved that a banner should be hung over Reed McDonald building that reads, “Objectivity Ends Here.” I can count right off the top of my head at least six incidences this semester w here The Battalion’s staff reporters have taken pot shots at either religious leaders, moral stands on issues or conservative views. Loren Steffy’s article attacking Pat Robertson is just another classic example of The Battalion’s obvious liberal bias. It is more than obvious that Steffy does not have the foggiest idea about what the Bible says about how to deal with unrighteous immoral men. This is not surprising because, as is the case w ith many of your staff reporters, he has never examined the scripture to figure out what God says about some of the issues. Pat Robertson, of course, has, but Stef fy naturally considers himself a better theologian. You would think that if the journalism department was at all interested in objectivity you would allow someone to express an opposite opinion. I understand that the University of Maryland allows one of the campus preachers to have his own column in their newspaper. T hey obviously have enough integrity to allow' both sides of the issues to be expressed in their newspaper. Does The Battalion have this sort of backbone? Michael Foarde ’87 EDITOR’S NOTE: Loren Steffy is not, and never has been, a staff reporter. He is Opinion Page editor and a col umnist, meaning it is his job to express his opinions. Natu rally, an opinion is not objective. Opinion in The Battalion is expressed only on this page and in analyses labeled as such. The journalism department and The Battalion are separate entities, so the department could do little to con trol the expression of opposite opinion. Furthermore, The Battalion is always open to other opinions from students, faculty or residents of the sur rounding area. However, such expression requires effort on the part of the individual. EDITOR: I rejoice with many Americans across the country w'hat seems a yeoman gesture by President Reaganio inflict a blow on what the United States calls the terroii capital of the world — Libya. Pictures do not lie. U.S. F-l 1 1 bombers attacked Libyans in the black of the night, shelling and killing innocent civilians, including children. As I ponder over this action, I come upwithmixed feelings. First, the U.S. has violated internationalbk invading another country in a time of peace (yes.itisti' Although I do realize the right of Americans to pi themselves, I wonder if the best method has beenseleff European diplomats unanimously agree thatottifl Arab nations, such as Lebanon, Syria and Iran areetp guilty of conducting terrorist attacks against theUniid States. Why Libya was selected as an example needsto! explained to the rest of the world when allies starttotn their backs. The British have strong evidence of support f Irish Republican Army from the United States.! has conducted terroirst activities against the British^ years. Would it not be logical then to assume thatIW States supports terrorist activities? What do you think the U.S. government is doing® Nicaragua? Supporting a rebel regime to overthrown; legitimate government is against international politics! Americans do so and w ill continue to do so becausetW carry a “big stick.” The reactions from the major allies accuratelyib the effects of this seemingly unpopular act. Germany, j Italy, Greece, France, Norway, Sweden, Holland,Eeyfj and Japan all opposed the action for a more civilized approach. Not surprisingly, Israel, Canada and the United Kingdom support the move, but British Prime Minis® 1 Margaret Thatcher is under intense criticism for her decision to allow take-off and landing of those 32 F-l' bombers. Frankly, only time will tell the effects of this acttlj has the whole world hissing. This sure is one for the Gipper, eh? Gabriel Elliott J Tic Letters to the Editor should not exceed 300 words in length. T l ' | rial staff reserves the right to edit letters for style and length^ make every effort to maintain the author's intent. Each letter 1 ’ signed and must include the address and telephone numberofth 1 ' Noi Sr.