Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 12, 1990)
The Battalion OPINION Monday, November 12, 1990 Opinion Page Editor Ellen Hobbs 845-: Grad students are against tuition increase Who are these people? Headlines in the Nov. 5 Battalion proclaimed that the Graduate Student Council opposes the petition signed by 1,125 graduate students protesting the increase in graduate tuition. In response to GSC’s stand on the proposed increase, I must say that this organization obviously does not represent me or anyone else who signed the petition. A plan to double graduate student tuition has been formulated and we Meg Moellenhoff Reader’s Opinion If could bo argued that the administration was operating in an information vacuum concerning this issue. I hope that 1,125 names on a petition will clear up any misconceptions that graduate students do not care if their tuition is doubled. should be concerned about its implications. Not only will we be paying more tuition than the graduate students at the University of Texas, but half-time graduate assistants at t.u. receive university-paid health insurance as well. Yes, I have a right to be concerned and angry! Despite Mr. Pogue’s concern about the political pressure to increase graduate student’s tuition, this concern is part of a larger issue in which the state of Texas is attempting to divest itself of financial responsibility for its institutions of higher learning. At present Texas A&M is not a state- supported institution but a state-assisted institution — between 30 and 40 percent of the operating costs of this University are borne by the state of Texas. As the University with the seventh largest endowment in the nation, over $1 billion, surely the measly $1 million in anticipated revenue from increased graduate tuition could be garnered from another source. If the University is trying to generate more sources of income, why pick on graduate students? The reputation of research universities rests on the publications generated by that institution. Graduate students are key contributors in the publication process. They also provide quality teaching, and their services are available to the University at a bargain rate. Although Vrudny protests that we are “acting recklessly” and expresses his concern that “the petition is going to ostracize them from A&M administrators,” I find his concern misplaced. The administration has made no attempt to solicit graduate students’ feedback for this tuition a strong response. To this point, it could be argued that the administration was operating in an information vacuum concerning this issue. I hope that 1,125 names on a petition will clear up any misconceptions that graduate students do not care if their tuition is doubled. The ongoing philosophy of this country for the last ten years has been “take from those who cannot fight back.” Well, ten years may be long enough for something to be considered a tradition, but it’s one tradition that A&M could do without. Meg Moellenhoff is a graduate assistant in the chemistry department This Reader’s Opinion came accompanied by three signatures. CH) OMEGA at the 5340f SPRING HO mato. AGRICULTl 6:30 a TAMU SCUI Ruddi POLITICAL Bowlii STUDENTS Call P CUBAN CU Call E PHI THETA floor ( increase. Although we have little time as a consequence of our academic, research and teaching responsibilities, this issue is important enough to us to take time from our busy schedules to demonstrate IMail Call! w! ■ | ■■v.. ■ Columnist doesn’t grasp liberalism There are liberal economists EDITOR: This is in reply to Andrew Matthews’ column headlined “Texas A&M liberals aren’t so bad after all” printed on the Opinion Page on Nov. 6. Coming from a person who is a columnist in our school paper, Matthews’ condescension toward the entire student population at Texas A&M was quite humorous. Are we to sur mise from his column that only economics majors are “true” conservatives, while the rest of the student population are just peasants who, due to the “lack of a disciplined economic the ory,” are suffering from major delusions about “peace and lo ve” in the world? It was quite unclear from his column what exactly he meant by “income-support programs that destroy families.” Perhaps I am not well versed enough in the intricacies of eco nomics to even begin to understand why this has to be so. Most people go on welfare after their families have split apart. I am a foreign student, and perhaps that may bias your opinion of me (how could I ever understand the complexities of capitalism?), but I can assure you that socialism has not been the only “intellectual disguise” of oppression in Asia and Africa as you so boldly proclaim. May I remind you of the Shah’s dictatorship in Iran, apartheid in South Africa (whose opponents you described as “self-righteous morons”) and Ferdinand Marcos in the Phil ippines. The list extends on to Central and South America (El Salvador, Somoza in Nicaragua, Pinochet in Chile, Guate mala, Argentina, etc.). Do you see a thread of connection be tween them all? It would be pointless to begin another round of conserva tive vs. liberal arguments, but in this case it is hard to resist. In my humble opinion (I’m sure you’re thinking pinko-commu- nist-reactionary), generally, it has been conservative thinking which leads one to cover up the problems and make things look all shiny and nice on the outside, while liberal ideas have been the ones which have actually tried to identify and solve problems. I found your use of “groovy peace signs” particularly funny, revealing to me your obvious ignorance of anything more left than Jesse Helms (If you can stereotype liberals, I’ll be most happy to stereotype conservatives.) It’s too bad A&M doesn’t offer “Ego Reduction 101.” All I can do is remind you that Karl Marx was an economist, too. EDITOR: In a recent column, senior economics major Andrew Mat thews calls most Aggies “latent liberals.” We are coached by his article to think that formal economics training might cor rect erroneous liberal leanings. He concludes, “So I would like to praise all those wild and crazy left-wingers on campus. Even if they are usually wrong, at least they make us think.” For those of you non-latent liberals who might feel reas sured by Mr. Matthews’ column, please don’t stop thinking. There really are economists who understand “markets, prices, firm behavior and macroeconomic theory” who are not conservatives. Nobel Prizes in economic science have been awarded to conservatives; i.e., Milton Friedman, James Buchanan, George Stigler and Friedrich von Hayek. Nobel Prizes also have been awarded to liberal economists: i.e., Paul Samu- elson, Lawrence Klein, James Tugin and a teacher of mine, Swedish economist Gunnar Myrdal (who received his award in 1971 with von Hayek). To confuse matters more about the relationship between economics and liberals or conservatives, in the past election George Bush relied on Stanford economist and current chief of economic advisers Michael Boskin while Michael Dukakis received advice from Boskin’s student, Harvard economist Laurence Summers. So you latent liberals out there, you are not relegated by your political position to that of an economic buffoon. And you conservatives out there, Mr. Matthews’ minority of Ag gies, please continue to think and dialogue. We can both learn a lot from each other and it can be stimulating. After all, that is what education is all about — challenge of thought, consideration and possibly change. While Saddam Hussein is a truly detestable person, most people do not realize that it was our foreign policy that made him this way. When he invaded Iran, we tacitly endorsed him. We sold him chemical weapons, and he used them on Irani ans and his own people. Our government remained silent. Gibbs Dibrell graduate student Now the same deadly chemicals we sold him threaten our soldiers in Saudi Arabia, and our President”uses Hussein’s chemical threat as an excuse to paint an even darker picture of the situation. In the current political climate, it appears that the Bush administration has its sights set on a military solution to this crisis, at the expense of approximately 1.8 billion dollars per month. If war should break out, we could spend as much as 1 billion dollar per day. And for what? President Bush has claimed that we are in tervening to protect our national security and the American way of life. What is 50 cents a gallon really worth? 10,000 lives? 50,000? Is controlling the price of oil worth a recession? We cannot allow the crisis in the Middle East to over shadow the real security threats that face us at home. More than one-third of all Americans pay so much for housing that they do not have enough money left over for such basic neces sities as food, clothing and medical care. Our cities suffer from a state of disrepair, poverty and hopelessness. Our youth increasingly turn to drugs to escape this reality. And our environmental problems almost seem al ready beyond solutions. Before committing the United States to a war in the Mid dle East that will drain more resources away from the real se curity crisis here at home and inevitably result in needless death and destruction, President Bush and Congress should first target our nation’s distorted and misdirected federal budget. And then let us consider if President Bush has the right to intervene without the full backing and approval of the Ameri can public. Dwight Barry ’92 Support for Bush surprising EDITOR: Have an opinion? Express it! Asif A. Siddiqi graduate student As the crisis in the Middle East stretches towards its third month, and the budget crisis has threatened to shut down our government, it is odd to see how many people still support President Bush’s stand in the Persian Gulf. Letters to the editor should not exceed 300 words in length. The editorial staff resents the right to edit letters for style and length, but will make every effort to maintain thi 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 numbtr of the writer. All letters may be brought to 216 Reed McDonald, or sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111. ALCOHOLI! 845-C BETA ALPI Centi CO-OP: TH p.m.i HONORS S der. INQUIRY C Kittei matic The rest spected by Departmer 2. In forma tablishmen SCORE! Burger I Points wei failure to clean non-] spection w; Zachry! aartment < THb an ~ v, 360) Member of Texas Press Association Southwest Journalism Conference The Battalion Editorial Board Cindy McMillian, Editor Timm Doolen, Managing Editor Ellen Hobbs, Opinion Page Editor Holly Becka, City Editor Kathy Cox, Kristin North, News Editors Nadja Sabawala, Sports Editor Eric Roalson, Art Director Lisa Ann Robertson, 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- Colle^e 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 Monday through Friday during Texas A&M regu lar semesters, except for holiday and ex amination periods. Newsroom: 845-3313. 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 77843-11 1 1. 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. Adventures In Cartooning by Don Atkinson J V i