The Battalion
OPINION
Wednesday, May 30,1990
Opinion Page Editor Damon Arhos
‘Debate’ with plastic cutout embarrassed Parker, legislaturt
Not everyone took the Memorial Day
holiday off. Senator Carl Parker,
chairman of the Texas Senate
Education Committee, spent the day
talking to himself.
Parker, a Democrat from Port
Arthur, had challenged Republican
Gubernatorial Candidate Clayton
Williams to an education debate which
he set for Memorial Day. And since
Williams attended Congressman Steve
Bartlett’s Memorial Day picnic in Dallas
instead, Parker ended up debating a
cutout of Williams riding a horse.
Yes, a plastic cutout.
Maybe, just maybe, Parker didn’t
have anything better to do than to
debate a plastic cutout. I mean, just
because one is a Texas senator doesn’t
mean that they have to spend the day
remembering our veterans — you
know: placing flags on graves, giving
Damon
Arhos
•
Opinion Page Editor
jh J A "
L m, — -
Memorial Day speeches, attending
parades or going to picnics. (It’s possible
that he didn’t get invited to anything.)
However, it is my guess that Carl
Parker just wanted to stage an event that
would both get him some press and
make of Claytie look bad for not
showing up. After all, it does seem
rather strange that Parker picked a
national holiday for the event. Is there a
Mail Call
B-CS landfill less than impressive
EDITOR:
What a wonderful reason for a celebration. Bryan-College Station is join
ing in the spirit of cooperation to open a new landfill. Maybe we should all get
together and congratulate ourselves for this impressive achievement.
How can such an event take place at a time when people’s environmental
consciousness should be at an all time high following Earth Day last April 22?
It is insane for us to continue destroying large areas of land so that we can
have disposable dipers and three copies of the same phone book every year.
Recycling is such common sense; yet, we insist on opening more landfills
and wasting natural resources.
I would implore everyone who reads this to think about what you throw
away, where it goes and how much of an impact recycling it would make.
Michael Gillenwater ’93
Special events center should not be priority
EDITOR:
I read the interview with President Mobley (April 26 — The Battalion)
and would like to comment on his remarks.
President Mobley mentioned several times the lack of funding at A&M
compared to our recent growth. Of this I have no doubt.
Consequently, I was surprised to read that in these tight financial times, a
$35 million special events center is apparently of such high priority.
In fact, it appears that it is a higher priority thap hiripg.jnore good faculty,
building more instructional facilities and better parking areas — all of which
were cited by President Mobley as present needs.
As for the funding of the special events center, I am a little confused. Pres
ident Mobley says this money would not be spent on academic development in
any case.
Since he indicates that PUF money is involved, it is news to me that this
money is not available for academic needs.
Funding for this center will also come from fees and tickets — the bulk of
which I suspect are actually paid by students.
If it is true that money obtained from students can’t be used to improve
the student environment at our school, then perhaps this rule needs chang
ing.
As for the use of the proposed facility, I again have my doubts. The Rud
der complex is a fine facility that has hosted theater productions and aca
demic conferences previously.
Any conference requiring more space than Rudder Auditorium would
likely go to a larger city.
True, the special events center will provide a larger setting for graduation
exercises.
But I believe it is the work you do before you cross the stage at graduation
that makes you worthy of the degree, regardless of how inspiring that short
walk may be.
Finally, the center will host basketball games and “major events of all
kinds.”
It is unclear how these last two activities will add anything to a degree ex
cept perhaps basketball literacy.
The question that sticks in my mind is whether it is better to meet the
needs President Mobley has outlined or to build a special events center.
To my way of thinking, I don’t agree with the choice that is being made.
If you disagree with the choice, also, then make you views known to those
who are determining the needs and priorities of our school.
Kirk J. Strozewski ’88
Have an opinion? Express it!
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. There is no guarantee that
letters submitted will be printed. Each letter must be signed and must include the classification, address and
telephone number of the writer. All letters may be brought to 216 Reed McDonald, or sent to Campus Mail
Stop 1111.
better time to catch a candidate for
public office tied-up for the day?
Parker’s antics are truly degrading to
himself and to the legislative body that
he represents. If Parker truly wanted to
debate Williams on the education issue,
he should have proposed a more
opportune time for the event. Parker’s
tactics of simply challenging the
gubernatorial candidate to a debate and
then expecting him to respond and
participate on Parker’s own terms just
won’t cut it.
After Parker went on with the so-
called “debate” with the Williams
“stand-in” plastic cutout, the cutout
itself became the news of the day. If
Parker had a point to make with the
debate, it was lost in the hype over his
debating partner. The Associated Press
news story that I read didn’t mention
any specifics about the debate until the
fourth paragraph. Obviously, Parker’s
message that Williams “lacks even a
superficial knowledge of where we are”
with education reform was
overshadowed by his use of the cutout.
“I
If Parker had a point to
make with the debate, it
was lost in the hype over
his debating partner.”
And even irParTerTiK^eTTus^
message across, how accurate is it? Is it
true that Williams “lacks even a
superficial knowledge of where we are”
with public education? Or is Williams
correct in dubbing Parker’s education
legislation the “Parker-Richards Income
Tax Bill,” indicating his belief that it will
eventually lead us to a state income tax?
Is Williams really out of touch with
public education because he believes
public education can be financed
without new taxes?
In the same Associated Pressatii
Parker is quoted as saying, “Texas#
truly going to be in sad shape witli
public education and with our tax
policies if we continue to relyonS
second sound bites and slick TVadij
rather than making candidates ans,
hard questions.”
I couldn’t agree with you more'
Parker.
So why don’t you do us all a 1
stop debating plastic figures; stopir
to create news stories (and soundt
about campaign issues that lack ret
substance.
Mr. Parker, the voters of Texas t
for that matter, of Port Arthur) nee:;
senator — not an actor.
Damon Arhos is a senior jt
major.
The Battalion
(USPS 045 360)
Member of
Texas Press Association
Southwest Journalism Conference
Associated Collegiate Press
The Battalion Editorial Board
Monique Threadgill,
Editor
Melissa Naumann,
Managing Editor
Damon Arhos,
Opinion Page Editor
Holly Becka, City Editor
Meg Reagan,
Lisa Ann Robertson,
News Editors
Clay Rasmussen, Sports Editor
Eric Roalson, Art Director
Todd Stone, Lifestyles Editor
Editorial Policy
The Battalion is a non-profit, self-sup
porting newspaper operated as a commu
nity service to Texas A&M and Bryan-
College Station.
Opinions expressed in The Battalion
are those of the editorial board or the au
thor, and do not necessarily represent the
opinions of Texas A&M administrators,
faculty or the Board of Regents.
The Battalion is published Tuesday
through Friday during Texas A&M sum
mer semesters, except for holiday and ex
amination periods.
Mail subscriptions are $20 per semes
ter, $40 per school year and $50 per full
year: 845-2611. Advertising rates fur
nished on request: 845-2696.
Our address: The Battalion, 230 Reed
McDonald, Texas A&M University, Col
lege Station, TX 77843-1111. Newsroom:
845-3313.
Second class postage paid at College
Station, TX 77843.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes
to The Battalion, 216 Reed McDonald,
Texas A&M University, College Station
TX 77843-4111.
Old China Hands
MAftswes
HCVSICN F«T
Shrimpers must stop ‘raping’ ecosy:
so that marine life escapes extinctioi
The turtle issue gets the most
publicity when shrimpers are in the
news, but there is another side of the
story that rarely sees media publicity.
Shrimp trawling is essentially
ecosystem harvesting. Anything and
everything that gets in the path of a
shrimp trawler will die. For every
pound of shrimp caught, 10-22 pounds
of fish die; that’s 2.5 billion pounds
every year. Where does this “trash” fish
go? It is dumped overboard to be
consumed by the everpresent hordes of
seagulls, terns and pelicans. Shrimpers
are slowly chipping away at the
ecosystems that provide most of us with
the fish we eat.
Logic can easily predict the future of
trawling. Most of the fish caught are not
considered “valuable” because they are
either the wrong species or too small. In
nature, everything eats everything;
there is no such thing as a “trash”
species. By killing these so-called “trash”
species, shrimpers are slowly dissecting
the marine food webs.
In addition, the “valuable” species are
often too small to keep; if shrimpers
continually kill young fish, what will
happen when all the old fish have finally
Michael
Smith
Reader’s Opinion
died? No young fish now means no old
fish later. Some important species
shrimpers often kill include red
snapper, redfish, pompano, bluefish,
king mackerel and Spanish mackerel.
The wasteful practices of shrimp
trawling must come to an end.
Shrimpers can no longer be allowed to
harvest ecosystems. This idea is not a
new one, but one first observed by the
British Parliament in 1367. It was here
that a trawl is first described: “ ... by
means of which instrument the
fishermen aforesaid take so great
abundance of fish that they know not
what to do with them but feed and
fatten the pigs with them to the great
damage of the whole commons of the
kingdom and the destruction of the
fisheries in like places.”
How can we end this waste? The
solution is easy. First, we can boycott
shrimp. Some say this is ineffective
because only 25 percent of our shrimp
comes from American shrimpers.!
really doesn’t matter, though. Wasit
waste no matter where it occurs.
Second, we can write to our elected
representatives, urging them to pas;
more stringent legislation protectin;
turtles. Finally we can all writealettfj
Dr. John Knaves (NOAA, 14th and
Constitution NW, Washington, DC,
20238). He is the undersecretary of
commerc and needs to be urged toll
judges impose stricter penalties on
turtle-exclusion-deviceless shrimper
and shrimpers who injure turtles
purposely.
In 1988, 42 percent of all strandec
sea turtles had purposeful, human-
inflicted mutilations; these rangedf:
bludgeonings and smashed shells to
shooting wounds and decapitations
Some shrimpers appear to be seekinj
revenge against turtles instead ofthe
turtle-savers.
Whatever action is taken, it mustl<
aimed towards reducing both turtle
fish bycatch to zero. Shrimpers have
been raping our marine ecosystems
enough.
Michael Smith is a senior wildlifei
fisheries sciences major.
Fax
T'Ve OoT 2.\ ldouR&
?f\LL
IN AMA y FF/l y ?WS } 4?>fD.
/ 1)0 Vou. umr
ft \A£oP^
HeY, IT'S UKB
Fb&EBfKU—UJB
'file $f\Me
X CjPulo po IT Fl&fV.
E.Y&3FT 'THegg /
GfZPCD<£ \
3Y
flT A*M Y^Bur
Ad A &TUPEMT
&VZR.Y To A Goop
larMNAT/cr/. sruc&w
< pcewj'rnflTK;
OHItfad*# fbg n
X just nke
CEMfN Xo Obie CMf\L
on