uiber 6, is’
from Pagi
tWacts a}J|—
sitle, will f I Friday, September 6, 1991
deruse of
tiyour da:;
amination,
itionallofi;
not hesitaif
ian quest:;
ion or diapj
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 13
we
Miller should
resign
xMe Jun/ convicts Brazos county sheriff of gambling with dice
ISIS with;;
ays, laboic:
is might be
B
ad news for local doughnut shop owners. Things are not looking
;ood for the Brazos County Sheriff's Department. For those of you so
ortunate as to have missed another summer school session in the
rexaminat fy-yan-College Station metropolitan area, it seems our sheriff has been caught
CheCUo S' thhis chips down.
require® According to local news reports, Sheriff Ronnie Miller was arrested when
is te ^ ate troopers raided an illegal gambling operation on Wallis Road. He was in
dicted by a grand jury for two class C misdemeanors and
convicted this week of the charge of playing the dice game
"craps." Because it was only a misdemeanor, he will not
have to resign from office.
For most of us, this does not reflect favorably on our
county's chief law enforcement officer. Others might point
out it was only a class C misdemeanor (the equivalent of a
traffic violation) and a $100 fine.
For those of you, like myself, who grew up in a rural
Texas county, you may be accustomed to electing a sheriff
in the las!||
Ty
| Clevenger
bin the las:
: required:
xses)
t one dose:
: one dose;
rculosisl
Clevenger is a
senior
^environmental
science major.
tedStateJ^d on a ^dity to cuss and drink beer. So it's no big deal our sheriff was
“’mooting craps and playing cards with a few of the boys after work. That's all
nizata ^ was doing, right?
1th centeill Wrong. Take a look at the circumstances surrounding Miller s case. Ac-
Mth thes cording to reports:
11 be blotl - • Miller's attorney did not deny the sheriff was at the residence shooting
lasses. Ice, only that the state's laws are vague as to what constitutes gambling,
our doct:| • The co-owners of the residence were indicted on
ecovery: f e i on y charges of organized criminal activity. One of
i takecariH e co-owners plea-bargained for a reduced charge of
B-omoting gambling. Miller was the only one
\ l* ? I !ftarged with a misdemeanor instead of a felony,
nal auesiS * co " owner who plea-bargained has testi-
4 md that it was an organized gambling operation,
Rmplete with tables, attendants and the whole
■orks. It wasn't just a few of the boys playing
Birds at the kitchen table.
From Pagf • \ state DPS agent testified a man was posted in
Sheriff Miller, with what was obvi-
In other words, they ap-
S a£
it of
press st the room, in
ously an illegal sawed-off shotgun,
dense irparently had an illegally armed bouncer to keep anyone from cutting in on the
a poshni> action.
reonlhi® Miller's defense was based on two technicalities. As noted, on one count
y s nuc he argued that the law is vague about what legally constitutes gambling. His
urt 1 defense had the other charge thrown out because of the prosecutor's error in
| pi ' tht! indictment in defining the nature of the game Miller played.
In th est J| The prosecutor mistakenly referred to blackjack as a dice game instead of a
ir territorS r d game.
on raJI Ironically, the sheriff who talks tough about those criminals who get off on
et econo-ttfchnicalities now has tried to get himself off on one or two. Tough on crime?
:>wn proffjurt me, please.
oing hur|i 1 don't know that this little operation was connected to some mobster
ftmed Vinny from New Jersey. As a matter of fact. I'm almost sure it's not.
liit you would think that somebody standing there guarding the door with an
Jcdara j]| e g a i, sawec j. 0 ff shotgun might have clued off an experienced law enforce-
1 ment officer that something wasn't right.
' uritv! At best, we have one of the most monumental cases of poor judgment and
Id pronii professorial ineptitude in all of law enforcement. At worst, our sheriff over-
inoritieJdoks local criminal activity.
kupissi® I've heard some grumblings out there that this was all a partisan setup and
eedomaan attempt by some to take a shot at Ronnie Miller. I hope not, but knowing
form Brazos County politics, I wouldn't be surprised.
rse the* Ultimately, though, the bottom line remains the same - Sheriff Miller broke
itrol to'th e j avvs he SW ore to uphold. When he should have been fighting crime, he
™ s arK: was patronizing it.
•aid J ^ ve a ^ so ^ ear< ^ complaints about the "undue media attention" surrounding
Miller's case. If it were anybody else, they say, no one even would have cared
p jrt ^ about the trial. Maybe so, but "anybody else" isn't the chief elected law en-
overn®# rcernent officer of the county, and "anybody else" didn't take an oath to up
hold the law.
I Anyone who has held or run for elected office can tell you when you live in
iglass house, you don't throw rocks. And you don't throw dice either. No-
ipdy made Ronnie Miller run for sheriff, but when he assumed the powers of
Office, he also assumed the public scrutiny that goes with it
I Regardless of how you feel about the morals of gambling, it is (in most cas-
j|) illegal. And the fact that the sheriff gambled shows a lot more about his
iiaracter and his respect for the law (or the lack thereof) than it does about his
belief in the morals of gambling.
I I never felt sorry for Gary Hart either. And interestingly, there are parallels
«re. Hart's sex life might not have directly affected his capacity to serve as
resident, but what did it say about his character? If he couldn't keep a com
mitment to his wife, why should he keep one to his constituents? Judgment?
iitegrity? You may say a lot of people cheat on their spouses, but he wasn't "a
lot of people," he was a candidate for president.
I And you might argue a lot of people gamble and break the law, but Ronnie
Biller wasn't "a lot of people" either. He was the sheriff of Brazos County and
f, like Gary Hart, chose to live in the glass house.
Presumably the local GOP will be more cautious about who it recruits to
n on the ticket. There are plenty of fair-weather Republicans out there who
ould like to take advantage of all those good Ags - the ones who indiscrimi-
ntly vote a straight party ticket. This time, though. Miller has rendered
imself unre-electable.
Regardless, Miller has betrayed the trust of the people who elected him and
owes them something in return - his resignation.
And for those 15 or so resident PPPs (perpetual political protesters) out
ere, I applaud you for standing up for what you believe in and trying to
lop the injustices of the world. More people should quit whining and start
ing something about it. But remember that charity begins at home. You can
art by cleaning up the Brazos County Courthouse.
THE BECOpP
NEW JERSEY
U.S. should build more nuclear
plants for electricity production
Matt
McBarnett
licBurnatt it a
senior electrical
engineering major.
I n recent years, ho stronger fo
rum for contention has existed
than the one surrounding nu
clear energy. This results from an un
derlying fear many Americans have
of the industry.
Sadly, dais fear
roots in the pop
ulace's basic mis
understanding of
nuclear power.
Since its in
ception, nuclear
power has been
associated with
life-threatening radiation leaks and
zahy mutations as seen in 1950s hor
ror movies. Trust me, ants cannot
grow to twenty feet and radiated
food really did not give Gilligan the
strength of 10 ordinary men.
Nuclear energy has proven itself
to be the most efficient and cleanest
form of power production, despite
what thousands of misinformed
protesters might have us believe.
Currently, electricity consumption
is increasing at an alarming rate. The
overall demand for electricity 7 has in
creased almost 50 percent. Our pre
sent electric plants cannot come close
to providing the necessary power.
Most of our electricity comes from
steam-driven turbines. Unfortunate
ly, only 20 percent of these plants use
nuclear energy. Virtually all of the
remaining power results from the
burning of non-renewable resources
such as oil/coal and natural gas.
Solar, wind and hydroelectric en
ergy 7 harnessing measures exist, but
the sun does not always shine, the
wind does not alwayslblow, and
most of our hydroelectric potential
has already been realized. These
methods, therefore, need backup sys
tems. We presently have little choice
but to rely on oil for transportation
purposes. But we do have a choice
for electricity 7 .
The oil crises of 1973 and 1979
should have warned us about the
dangerous situation in which we
have placed ourselves. We failed to
heed the warnings, as the losses of
thousands of Iraqi lives and millions
of U.S. dollars testify. 1 am amazed
to see the same people who protested
the war, and who are clearing the
path for the recent environmental
bandwagon, are also the same indi
viduals who have protested or con
tinue to protest nuclear power. This
further adds to a long-held belief of
mine that a large number of these
people know virtually nothing about
certain issues, except what is. trendy.
Nuclear energy, and the resulting
replacement of fossil fuel-fired plants
All the spent fuel produced in the United
States to date could be stacked less than 3
yards high on a single football field.
helps create a cleaner environment
worldwide. Nothing is burned. At
the end of 1989, nuclear energy facili
ties produced nearly 20 percent of
the world's electricity. Producing
this amount of power with coal
would have added almost two billion
tons of carbon dioxide (the principle
cause of the "greenhouse effect’ 1 ) to
the atmosphere.
Fossil fuel burning also releases
massive amounts of sulfur oxides
and nitrogen oxides into the air, caus
ing acid rain which destroys forests
and lakes The Chernobyl accident
raised many questions about the
safety of nuclear plants. Resellch in
dicates such an accident could never
happen here because safety require
ments in the United States on nuclear
plants are as strict as those placed on
anything in our country. The former
executive director of the American
Council on Science and Health noted,
when referring to nuclear plants,
"there has not been one - not one -
death or injury to the public from ra
diation in a quarter century of opera
tion."
But what about nuclear waste,
that dreadful radioactive stuff?
Won't it turn me green and give my
children 57 toes? I am no more fear
ful of nuclear waste than I am of a
drought in the Brazos Valley. Nucle
ar waste is simply used nuclear fuel
rods. After about three years, these
rods are placed in temporary storage
at the nuclear plant site.
The spent fuel does remain ra
dioactive for quite a while. However,
95 percent of the radioactivity dissi
pates as heat within six months. In-
plant storage has safely handled all
of the spent fuel ever produced by
our nuclear electric plants.
A total of 17,000 tons of used nu
clear fuel has been produced by all
commercial nuclear electric plants
since the beginning of nuclear pow
ered electricity 30 years ago. In fact,
this amount is so small, it could be
stacked less than three yards high on
top of Kyle Field's playing surface.
In the future, the Department of
Energy plans to seal the waste in spe
cial canisters which will be placed in
absorbent clay deep in the ground in
certain geologic formations which
have been stable for years.
The key to the necessary accep-
Mnce of nuclear energy is an in
formed public, not one which bases
its notions and policies on the ideas
of a group of mishappen radicals.
The U.S. Council for Energy
Awareness is a private, non-profit or
ganization which provides informa
tion on nuclear energy and other en~
viotimemai concerns.
I suggest that anyone skeptical of
nuclear power contact them and use
facts to form opinions.
e-
J
Representative Barton proposes law
Congressmen should not undergo random drug tests
R!
andom drug testing in America exists almost sole
ly in collegiate and Olympic athletics. Testing in
^industry only occurs if the company de
cides to follow the presidential drug programs.
Testing in schools almost never happens. Howev
er, if Joe Barton has his way, members of Congress
and their staffs will have to submit to random
drug testing.
"If the lowest-ranking soldier in a Saudi desert must
submit to drug testing, shouldn't the member of Congress
who sent him there be tested?" Congressman Joe Barton
asked Wednesday in a Houston newspaper, as he explained
the drug testing program in his own office.
The transportation industries have always been the tar
get of attempts to enforce random drug testing. Unfortu
nately, some of the workers in those industries have given
the public cause for alarm.
Last week, a subway driver crashed his train and fled
the scene of the accident. He was found 10 minutes later at
his apartment with a blood-alcohol level of 0.10, and a bag
of cocaine was found under the driver's seat of the train.
The Exxon Valdez ran aground last year while the captain
was passed out in his bed. Airplane pilots, train engineers,
taxi drivers and many other operators of public transit and
freight have been found under the influence of drugs while
on the job.
Mandatory random drug testing for transportation
workers should have been passed by Congress awhile
back. These tests cannot be called an invasion of privacy
because workers lives are not private while they are on the
job.
The care of hundreds of people on an airplane is about
the least private tiling I can think of. The American citizen
has a right to the safest public transportation possible.
However, random drug testing in other industries or in
a citizen's private activities is uncalled for. Con
gressman Barton's in-house drug testing for his
aides is a personal decision by an employer.
Barton says he has taken the test three times
himself, which is administered by an outside
firm. He has introduced a bill into the House
which would make random drug testing for Congressmen
and their aides mandatory.
Fortunately, he has only been able to find one co-spon
sor, Rep. Benjamin Gilman from New York, a member of
the Select House Committee on Narcotics Abuse and Con
trol. The other Congressmen have been rather quiet on this
bill, and it has been buried in a committee.
The quote from Barton suggests that he thinks the bill
would be fair. The lawmakers should follow their own
laws. It sounds very simple, but it could be very danger
ous for citizens' privacy. The only mandatory drug law on
the books is for the military.
Congressmen may decide in the future thar if they have
to have drug tests, then everyone else should as well. The
Supreme Court in session now just might agree random
drug tests are necessary for police work. Drug use is a vice
like smoking and drinking - done alone it hurts only the
user. Drunk drivers should not be allowed to drive, but
randomly asking people to urinate in a cup, then arresting
them if they have alcohol or drugs in their blood is not the
answer. Half of the population of A&M would be in jail by
now. Drivers of public transit should be tested on their job,
and should be arrested for drunken behavior. But drug
and alcohol use is a personal choice. It should only be test
ed for when that behavior endangers other people.
Hovg qn opinion? Express it!
The Battalion is interested in hearing from its readers.
All letters to the editor are welcome. Written letters must be signed and include classification, address and daytime phone
number for verification purposes. Anonymous letters will not be published.
The Battalion reserves the right to edit all letters for length, style and accuracy. There is no guarantee letters will appear.
Letters may be brought to 013 Reed McDonald, sent to Campus Mail Stop 1111 or can be faxed to 845-5408.