Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (June 7, 1995)
PINION The Battalion • Page 5 Wednesday • June 7, 1995 12th Man Plaza project A couple of weeks ago a re cent study brought to my attention that the aver age salaries of professors at other universities are nine per cent higher than those at Texas A&M University. Dur ing the 1994-1995 academic year, many of the professors whose classes we attend made about $6,000 less than the average of their peers at similarly-sized schools. “Well, boo hoo,” you might say, “If those eggheads were in it for the money, they wouldn’t be professors to begin with.” And I would say you’re probably correct. However, one must still wonder why good ol’ Aggieland has to skimp on professors’ salaries relative to the current market value. Is it because our teachers are less qualified than the market demands? Not at all. A&M seems to insist on “pedigreed” professors from well-regarded schools across the nation. This is an employment characteristic A&M takes great pride in as a student recruitment de vice. However, with below average pay, it may be come more difficult to keep these “purebreds.” Is it because A&M is a little low on cash and, in trying desperately to keep the electricity and water turned on, has decided to cut corners on professors’ salaries? Ummm ... no. Anyone is welcome to peruse the Uni versity budget available in the library and see just where all the money goes. It’s quite clear that with the hundreds of mil lions of dollars swirling around The Texas A&M University Corporation, it’s largely a matter of internal bureaucratic decision making as to how the money is spent. Is it because professors’ salaries are not as important as other stuff around here? I suspect it is. Now, in the interest of fairness, we have to re member our school is a business, a huge one. And there are certainly some budgets for our school that are decided by elected officials in Austin. But for the most part, the state allocates plenty of money based on many factors, including student enroll ment and possibly cotton futures in Bangladesh, for all we know. So, besides parking spaces, what else is more important than professors around here? Stumped? It’s sports! That’s right, we’re not an academic uni versity with an athletic department attached for fun and rivalry, we’re an athletic university with an academic department attached for research money and, uh ... well, research money. A May 24 article in the Bryan-College Station Eagle quoted Bill Perry, the associate provost and dean of faculties as saying, “The faculty have re overshadows academics mained loyal to Texas A&M during these lean bud getary times, but I fear that if we fall further and further behind, the outside world is going to start looking more attractive.” Whoa. The third-largest university in the coun try, behind other schools? Not in football, by golly. OK, our library isn’t even in the top 50, but what’s this “lean budget” stuff? Why are some budgets lean and others not? Although Perry’s allotted budget for professors’ salaries may be lean, there’s nothing he can do about it. However, the only things lean about ath letics around here are the steaks and the athletes who sweat for Aggieland. In fact, just the other day, while driving down Wellborn Road, I was ad miring the new $36 million Rec Sports Center. “Sure looks like a lean budget was at work here,” I thought to myself. And then there’s the Twelfth Man Plaza project. This project accepts $100,000 donations in the name of each offensive and defensive position on the football team and a $3 million contribution to represent the head coach position. Each contributor buys themselves part of an im mortal memorial etched in granite next to the Twelfth Man statue, giving A&M one more much- needed monument. Soon we will certainly surpass even Washington, D.C. Try as I might, I can’t begrudge Aggie athletics of all its money. If “rich ol’ Ags” want to give their millions to the football team or the athletic depart ment, then they should be free to do so and even congratulated for their gifts. But I also must congratulate those responsible for thinking up new ways to extract these millions from former students. An underpaid professor would call this tactic “creating a market.” What bothers me is that while so much money is being obtained and spent on athletics, we seem to be having trouble keeping professors’ salaries competitive. There is no real answer to satisfy both issues. It’s just a matter of what a budget committee, a student body and the Association of Former Students’ endless fund fountain perceive as being important. How important are well-paid, quality professors to you? It’s not a question of where the money is coming from, it’s a question of where it’s going. Aside from the fact that an athletic department and a winning football team can enhance a university experience, take a moment to ask yourself ... • Would I be here if A&M had no football team? * Would I still donate money years later? • WTat if the team was only mediocre? * Am I a student and a fan, or a fan and a student? Frank Stanford is a philosophy graduate student Backward Action Affirmative action promotes what it seeks to eliminate by years ago this na tion embarked on what has become an arduous journey to ensure equal oppor tunity among our country’s mi norities. Somewhere along the way, the principal leaders of this quest donned dark sunglasses and striped canes and led affir mative action into the ground. The greatest of all political detours occured when the phrase “equal opportunity” became synonomous with “equality.” Understanding the difference between these words is intrinsic to understanding the problem. Affirmative action was created to pro mote “equal opportunity” — the levelling of the playing field. It has since evolved into the promotion of “equality,” the idea that we were all created equal and therefore should be equally successful. The approach of creating an environment in which those discriminated against regain the opportunities they so readily deserve is, and always will be, a noble and just task. Affirmative action programs have strug gled to achieve this goal. However, in the effort, they have lost sight of a most-basic •premise: Treating individuals differently because of their ethnicity or numerical sta tus is wrong. We, as a nation, have not yet achieved our dreams of equal opportunity, but the so-called affirmative practices of the last two decades are now spawning the very quality they were created to destroy, as well as undermining the unity of a nation. Affirmative action has been manipulated and contorted into gender and racial preference programs, which have permeated much of our lives. Quotas and discrimination lawsuits have become the unspoken norm in our society. A whole new class of citizens has traded pride in personal achievement for a belief that the system is re sponsible for its success. The victimization of minorities has established the thought that somehow, because of past in equalities, minorities are de serving of special treatment and, baring special treatment, they are destined for failure. The result of preferential treatment is stig matizing. According to an article in Newsweek maga zine, in 1992, only one of the 280 African- American applicants to the University of Texas Law School scored high enough to be admitted without the consideration of race. It is not to say minorities are less intelli gent; however, to excel because of a character istic of one’s self rather than the quality of one’s self is certainly not “affirmative.” Whatever happened to good ol’ “American rugged individualism,” where hurdles were seen as chances for improvement? To rob someone of their failures is to rob them of an education and a chance for meaningful achievement. The true victims in all of this are those who have been passed up in the name of social progress. Destined to criticize those who have usurped them, these are the new racists. Like their minority counterp arts, they are quick to blame racism for their failures. In this sense, affirmative action is fostering a generation of Americans who compete only along racial lines. This bigotry proliferates race supremacy and allows previously-voice less extremists an audience. The solution no longer lies in stringent gov ernment regulation. It is time to dismantle a system that has cost us the integrity of a work ethic. Blindness to color and gender can be achieved; it is only a matter of realization and effort. Last week the Supreme Court, let stand a lower court ruling that scholarships re served for specific ethnic groups were un constitutional, thereby starting all stu dents on the same step. In California, Gov. Pete Wilson has promised to remove all state policies that ex tend preferential treatment based on ethnicity or gender. No longer in California will the mi nority businessperson be used as a pawn in the pursuit of state contracts. Reform like this is vital if we are to equal ize opportunity for everyone. There is no greater opportunity for improvement than on this country’s college campuses. Student equity in our universities can be achieved simply by removing all refer ences to race from entrance applications. Universities should be equally as color blind when hiring faculty. Their only con cern should be hiring the best possible pro fessors for the job, bar none, and let the racial chips fall where they may. It is not the duty of the university to pad statistics or increase graduation rates. It is up to individuals to study, and it is their respon sibility to graduate. We all have the ability to achieve in some areas of life; failure and success determine the paths we will walk. It is every American’s obligation to ensure these checks and balances are a part of every citizen’s life. In this day and age, it is no longer practical to discriminate based on gen der or race. Many future successes will be engi neered by the minds of people as diverse as their own dreams. As Martin Luther King said, now is the time “to judge all people not by the color of their skin but by the content of their character.” Alex Miller is a senior bioengineering major ; ! People do not choose sexuality This letter is in response to Kathy Carson’s letter to Mail Call on June 5, stating that ho mosexuality is merely a choice. Carson has no understand ing of the issues that a person deals with regarding their com ing out. I know from personal experi ence that homosexuality is not just a choice. No one can tell me, or any other gay, lesbian, bisex ual or transgendered person that we simply chose to be at tracted to the same sex. How can Mai i a person choose to be attracted to someone else? A person either is or is not at tracted to the same or opposite sex. I can no more make myself attracted to the opposite sex any more than she can make herself attracted to the same sex. Although Carson may believe that following the Lord will clear up any doubts one has about their “simple choice,” I suggest that she talk to some people about their “decision to be gay.” Alex Rigsby Class of ’95 • This letter is in response to Kathy Carson’s Mail Call letter on June 5. Her belief that homo sexuality is a choice is her own opinion, and I respect that. What I totally disagree with is how she does not consider her self homophobic and how she claims to know that the only an swer to a perfect world is through reading the Bible and through Christ. How dare she assume that her world is the only perfect world? It is so blatantly phobic to anyone and everything not included in Christian teachings that she has systematically eliminated most of the people in the world. She says she is not homopho bic. I think she is ignorant to the fact that many gay men and les bians — we don’t really use ‘ho mosexuals’ anymore — in this world do not follow the Bible and still have perfect lives according to their own opinions. How dare she say I am not hap py, full of joy or at peace because of who I am and what I believe. Paula Fedirchuk Graduate student Block grants will not starve children It’s nice to know that Chris Stidvent is concerned about chil dren going hungry. The national government is trying to give more power to the states by consolidat ing block grants, but there still will be some restrictions, so starv ing children will get their fill. As for his comments about separa tion of church and state, I would like to remind him that the First Amendment clearly states that Congress cannot prohibit the free exercise of religion. Voluntary moments of silence are constitutional. As a compro mise, though, to keep from divid ing religious students from non religious students, I would en courage parents to pray with their children before school. It would be an excellent opportunity for parent-child bonding. Erik Walsh Class of ’98 For every change, some thing else seems to remain the same. Discrimination, prejudice and fearful hatred are as alive today as they ever have been. Today’s social climate makes constant strides to ward better liberty and equality, but countless people and institutions improve the rest of society’s progress. The most recent example being Abilene Christian Uni versity’s dismissal of theater director Robert Neblett from a production of The Merchant of Venice based solely on his homosexuality. Neblett, an ACU alumnus, was invited to direct the pro duction but was quickly dis missed when school president Royce Money learned of Neblett’s sexual orientation. Money was quoted as saying, “We appreciate his tremen dous talent and find it unfor tunate that his choice of lifestyle has resulted in this situation.” The school determined that Neblett was unfit to rep resent the university because his lifestyle violated its moral code. This kind of ignorant intol erance should be ended. The university had an agreement with Neblett: he was to direct a Shakespeare an play to the best of his abil ity, and they were to give him the honor and credit for his production. Instead, ACU hu miliated and degraded Neblett in a public forum. Neblett responded to the inci dent, saying he was “crushed” and that he felt, “Abilene Christian Universi ty has ‘outed’ me and pushed me out of the closet in a pub lic way.” In a number of similar sit uations, this incident could be considered a case of wrongful dismissal. For in stance, at a public university like Texas A&M, dismissal based on race, sex or religion is illegal, and that umbrella could come to include sexual preference. While the dust settles from the ACU incident, it is inter esting to note that the real theatrical irony comes from the fact that The Merchant of Venice is a play spoofing mindless racism and preju dice, but that probably does n’t make Robert Neblett feel any better. Established in 1893 Editorials appearing in The Battalion reflect the views of the editorials board. They do not necessarily reflect the opinions of other Battalion staff members, the Texas A&M student body, regents, administration, faculty or staff. Columns, guest columns, cartoons and letters express the opinions of the authors. Contact the opinion editor for information on submitting guest columns. Editorials Board Jay Robbins Editor in Chief Rob Clark Managing Editor Sterling Hayman Opinion Editor Kyle Littlefield Assistant Opinion Editor Unfair Dismissal Sexual orientation should not be grounds for job termination. I T u Battalion Editorial Staff Jay Robbins, Editor in Chief Rob CLARK, Managing Editor Sterling Hayman, Opinion Editor Gretchen Perrenot, City Editor JODY Holley, Night News Editor Stacy Stanton, night news Editor MICHAEL Landauer, Aggieufe Editor NlCK GeorGANDIS, Sports Editor Stew Milne, Photo Editor Staff Members City Desk — Assistant Editor: Eleanor Colvin; Re porters: Katherine Arnold, Javier Hinojosa, Scott McMahan, Jill Saunders, Michael Sim mons, Wes Swift & Tara Wilkinson Aggielife Desk — Feature Writers: Kristen Adams, Amy Collier & Libe Goad; Columnist: Amy Uptmor Sportswriters — David Winder and Lee Wright Opinion Desk — Assistant Editor: Kyle Littlefield; Columnists: Elizabeth Preston, Frank Stan ford & David Taylor; Contributing Colum nists: Justin Barnett, Margaret Gordon, Alex Miller, Chris Stidvent & Mark Zane; Editori al Writers: Jason Brown & Alex Walters; Editorial Cartoonists: Brad Graeber & George Nasr Photographers — Mike Friend, Roger Hsieh, Nick Rodnicki & Eddy Wylie Page Designers — News: Kristin DeLuca & Kristen DeRocha; Sports: Robin Greathouse; Ag gielife: Stew Milne Copy Editors — Rob Clark & Sterling Hayman Graphic Artists — Toon Boonyavanich & Melissa Oldham Strip Cartoonists — Valerie Myers & Quatro Oakley Office Staff — Office Manager: Julie Thomas; Clerks: Wendy Crockett & Heather Harris News: The Battalion news department is managed by students at Texas A&M University in the Divi sion of Student Publications, a unit of the De partment of Journalism. News offices are in 013 Reed McDonald Building. Newsroom hours: Sunday, 2 p.m. to 10 p.m. Monday — Thursday, 10 a.m. to 1 0 p.m. Friday 10 a.m. to 5 p.m. Newsroom phone: 845-3313; Fax: 845-2647 E-mail: Batt@tamvm1.tamu.edu The Battalion Online: The Battalion offers photos and the day's headlines on the worldwide web. Web Site: http://128.194.30.84 Advertising: Publication of advertising does not im ply sponsorship or endorsement by The Bat talion. For campus, local and national dis play advertising, call 845-2696. For classi fied advertising, call 845-0569. Advertising offices are in 015 Reed McDonald and of fice hours are 8 a.m. to 5 p.m. Monday through Friday. Fax: 845-2678. Subscriptions: A part of the Student Services Fee entitles each Texas A&M student to pick up a single copy of The Battalion. Mail subscriptions are $20 per semester, $40 per school year and $50 per full year. To charge by VISA, MasterCard, Discover or American Express, call 845-2611. The Battalion (USPS 045-360) is published daily, Monday through Friday during the fall and spring semesters and Monday through Thursday during the summer sessions (except University holidays and exam periods), at Texas A&M University. Second class postage paid at College Station, TX 77840. POSTMASTER: Send address changes to The Battalion, 230 Reed McDonald Building, Texas A&M University, College Station, TX 77843.