Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (March 5, 1993)
Opinion Friday, March 5,1993 The Battalion Page 6 Trans-racial adoption A good thing for children, Texas Last week 326th District Judge Alete H cker allowed Philip and Lane Je* ■ ins to adopt the child who has lived with them for four years. Altl lough this might not seem significant on the surface, the fact that the Jenkins were awarded the adoption rights of the African- American boy offers hope for fu ture trans-racial adoptions in Texas. This is a monumental step in the transformation of Texas into a toler ant and integrated state. Numerous adoption agencies still feel that trans-racial adoption is not in the best interest of the child and do not allow it. Agencies say that in these instances, the child may experience an identity crisis. Although it is true that the chil dren may not be exposed to their own cultural backgrounds, they are beine placed in 1 ovine homes. Liv ing in a loving home is infinitely better than growing up in an or phanage or being shuffled from one foster home to another -- home in which these children still would find it difficult to experience their cultural heritages. The development of an ethnic heritage is a fundamental part of maturation, but it is not the only part. Love and support are also needed for a child to grow into a healthy adult, and both love and support transcend racial bound aries. With the abundance of par entless children in this country, it seems that any approvable family willing to adopt should be allowed to do so — regardless of race or eth nic background. Judge Alete Hacker should be commended for allowing the Jenk ins family to adopt their new son. Hopefully, this precedent-setting decision will clear the obstacles to trans-racial adoptions in Texas and will provide more loving homes for parentless children. Freedom of religion Debate good fomm for differences As religious differences spark vi olence around the world, the Wednesday night debate between the Campus Crusade for Christ and the Agnostic and Atheist Student Group demonstrated that differ ences can be debated in a peaceful and productive environment. Before a crowd of more than 600, the two groups explained the tenets of their respective belief systems and debated the existence of God. In a forum which could have invit ed carping and name-calling from either side, the groups discussed ideas in a controlled, rational man ner, surprising many members of the audience. Founded on a belief in freedom of religion, America has been large ly immune to the religious turmoil that has rocked the world through out the centuries. Northern Ireland, Bosnia and India are examples of places in which religious differ ences have turned into bloody bat tles. Freedom of religion is a Constitu tional right that all Americans en joy. The mere fact that this debate even occurred reveals the desire of students to discuss differences in order to better understand one an other. The fact that the debate was such a success shows that some measure religious tolerance is alive and well on the A&M campus. Abracadabra! Budget plan magic Numbers don't lie but Clinton's smoke, mirrors do C linton's recent budget proposal is supposedly the essence of the kind of changes he wants to make over the next four years. One change Clinton wants to implement is cutting America's ever-widening deficit. However, the prospects for real budget change are dim. The devil is in the details. Flushing Old Scratch out of Clinton's budget was none too hard. A careful inspec tion of the budget reveals an addition of $1.04 trillion to the total debt over the projected four years the budget covers, as calculated by the Office of Management and Budget. A billion here, a billion there and pretty soon you're talking real money. And this budget is ah austerity program? The fact is, overall spending increases every year in Clin ton's budget plan. There is no cut in total spending, and some $54 billion of the proposed spending cuts are actually tax or fee increases. That there is no cut in total spending does not bode well for a successful deficit reduction plan. The plan relies almost entirely upon tax increases, and pro jected revenues from the tax hike will probably not material ize if history is any guide. Taxes were raised in 1982,1984, 1987 and 1990, ostensibly to reduce the deficit. Each year following the tax hikes, the deficit increased. Economist Matthew Kibbe, commenting on the 1990 bud get deal, reported that "81 percent of the revenues expected" from the tax increases never materialized. And most of the tax increases that Clinton proposes are the product of a du plicitous mind, to put it mildly. Nationally syndicated columnist David Broder indicted Clinton's obfuscation over the tax increases last week. After the Bush campaign pointed out that Clinton could not fulfill his campaign promises without raising taxes on families earning $36,600 or more per year, Clinton replied, "It is bla tantly false ... it is a disgrace to the American people that the president of the United States would make a claim so baseless, that is so without foundation, so shameless in its at tempt to get votes under false pretenses." On Feb. 17 when Clinton unveiled his economic plan, he promised — with a straight face — that his tax plan would only effect those making over $30,000 per year, which was HBanBaEF9R!UHBBIBBK3£ ! n well below the Bush campaign forecast. Broder goes on to point out that Clinton's $30,000 thresh old is not what most people understand as income, but in cludes all kinds of "non-cash-income," along with benefits and the imputed rental value of a family's home. The higher taxes will actually start falling at a threshold nearer to $20,000 dollars than $30,000. This from the budget that wasn't going to resort to "smoke and mirrors." Clinton's repeated protest that he was forced into this po sition because of the unexpected $346 billion deficit for 1992 rings hollow: In the July issue of Business Week, Clinton said that the 1992 deficit would be close to $400 billion. Clinton's budget proposal doesn't include an attempt to reform health care, which will require even more taxes. In fact, some two dozen new taxes are being considered for this program. The administration claims it is determined to pro vide "universal access to affordable high-quality health care for all Americans." This gift to the American people comes with $30 billion to $90 billion a year in extra spending. When Clinton's Secretary of Health and Human Resources, Dr. Donna Shalala, was asked how the contradictory goals of cutting the deficit by 50 percent in four years and providing universal health care could be achieved simultaneously, she replied, "I'm not really sure I can answer that question at the level of detail you want." Universal health care would be the largest entitlement program created in the last 50 years. Entitlement programs represent the largest and fastest growing slice of the budget. Clinton, instead of grappling with the heart of the budget problem, will substantially exacerbate the issue. The ghost of budget deals past sleeps uneasily after tak ing a gander at President Clinton's budget proposal. It is all too familiar. The 1990 budget deal was also advertised as an austerity program. Domestic spending promptly grew at a faster rate under Bush than under any president in the last 30 years. The deal, which was supposed to save $500 billion over five years, lesd to a five year deficit estimated at over $1,426 trillion. Economists Gary and Aldona Robbins found that the 1990 budget deal led to "$2.74 of new deficit spend ing for each $1 of new taxes." One of the main architects of that plan was the "deficit hawk" Leon Panetta, then the House Budget Committee chair, now the White House bud get director. History looks set to repeat itself. Dickerson is a sophomore economics major. MATT DICKERSON Columnist Racist heckling at games is bad bull • I understand that heckling is a part of the fun in a baseball game, but where do we draw the line? I, like most Ags, en joy telling my friends what a wonderful school this is and how great the people are. Yet, I am sorry to s?* T "hat there are still a few students atter.dhsg A&M who make me wonder who I am. trying to con vince. Recently, I had a friend visit the cam pus and by coincidence, her university was playing A&M. We went to the game, and after only two innings, I found my self apologizing to her. As a Hispanic player came up to bat, I found myself in a very uneasy position when racist comments were yelled at him. The counting in Spanish as the player took practice swings did not seem to bother me as much as did the comment made by one person that the player should go back to Mexico after he struck out. I am not sure who this person was, but I wonder if he is also as proud to call him self an Aggie as I am. Is this what Texas A&M represents? What kind of picture does this behavior paint of Texas A&M for the children, visitors, and other Ag gies who have to listen to such racist com ments? I can't help but feel that the com ment was directed to me as well as every other minority on this campus and in this country. It hurt to hear my friend tell me that she could never attend a school like this. I realize that not everyone here shares the same opinions as that one outspoken per son and therefore, day after day, I try to regain the image I once had of Texas A&M University, the school I love so much. Chris Valladares Class of'95 • What's going on at the baseball f ;ames? The games are always a lot of un, but why make racist comments against Hispanic players from the other teams? I feel that it is OK to make fun if they move their butts funny or something like that, but just because the player is Hispanic gives no one the right tc count the swings in Spanish or to imitate Speedy Gonzalez. As a Hispanic student, I found these cheers very offensive, and for the first time, I felt embarrassed about being an "Aggie." I do not even want to think about the impressions that the players from UT Pan Am had of the Aggies. Let's stop this racial cheering and respect the ethnicity of the players. Remember, not all specta tors are white. Xavier Cervantes Class of '93 Media inflates Vidor problems, hurts city As I read Julie Polston's column "Good News Can be so Sickening" in Tuesday's Battalion, anger filled my every thought. I could not shake my hostile feeling to ward the news media here and through out the nation. Vidor is a small town of about 20,000 people, including its surrounding popula tion. Because of an extremely small yet vocal group racists, Vidor is having its name dragged through the mud by a sen- sationalistic media. Never mind the positive efforts of the local churches to drown out the voice of the Klan. Never mind the feelings of Vi dor's average citizen who welcomes the integration of local housing projects. Never mind the several minority families already residing in Vidor without prob lems from Vidor's "Racist Klan Popula tion." Peace doesn't sell newspapers. Hatred does. If hatred doesn't exist, why not fab ricate it? Right? Wrong. Polston's irresponsible jour nalism is exactly what brews hatred in this country. Before she reports the "facts," Polston might wish to confirm their validity first. The sign she spoke of does not exist. Maybe Dec Quir feels he has nothing to fear not only because he is a brave man but also because the vast majority of the Vidor population is not the hateful, bigoted, cross-burning group Polston claims it to be. Her preformed ideas about Vidorians are exactly what fuels the situation in Vi dor. If the media would cease in its sen sationalism, the situation in Vidor would resolve itself without incident. I feel that I speak accurately for the 20,000 living in and around Vidor. I am tired of being labeled a racist because of the actions of a few. 20,000 people can not be judged by the actions of fewer than 100. Vidor is not a racist town - it is just another victim of a yellow press. Russell Alan Miller Class of'94 Majority did not vote Clinton in election Regarding Corky McMillan's letter on Feb. 26: Yo Democrat "Wake up and Add it up" I think McMillan, his buddy Bill Clin ton and the rest of the Democrats should go back to school and learn some math. Just like the numbers in Clinton's eco nomic plan, McMillan's just don't add up. The "majority of Americans" did not want Clinton to be president. Statistics show only 40 percent of the people voted for Clinton while 60 percent, the "Majori ty," did not. . ]ohn P. Poskey Class of'94 Editorids appearing in The Battafcon reflect the views of the editorial board. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of other Batiaton staff members, the Texas A&M student body, regents, administralion, facufty or staff. Columns, guest columns, and Mail CaB items express the opinions of the authors. The Battafcon encourages letters to the editor and wfl print as many as space allows in the MaS Call section, letters must be 300 words or less and include the author's name, doss, and phone number. Due to space restrictions, guest columns wl not be accepted unless the author contacts the opinion page for prior approval before submitting columns. We reserve the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters should be addressed to: The Battalion - Mail Calf OT 3 Reed McDonald /MaJ stop 1111 Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843