Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 16, 1996)
Op: <ion Page 11: Monday • September 16, 1996; Generation Gap ocial security breeds greed ice drop; :wo field goals, idler finished 16-o ds before he wasrti e McNair with SdJ k led the Oilers ml ( atehes for 64 yard:l rename( j today, Social Security would e ense t its Dartl 1QSt j-,0 called “social insecurity.” kit occupies an increasing portion of !ral expenditures, the benefit program aving less and less money for other ral programs. : a compromise is not reached soon to ess its rapid growth in beneficiaries, al Security will become difficult to ain, and it will be our generation who bear the costs. fith the average life expectancy grow- the financial burden of this program is cted to increase. ccording to research done by econo- Eli Ginzberg, 50 workers paid taxes to aerense cna its part :ized by coach left! py play in last week's over Jacksonville. :ly got the raes ig on the Ravens fa d helping the Oilers ftime lead, inny Testaverde thro terception in thefii Ravens games b threw two in the half and the Oilers! him pay bothtr Chandler Wycheck wit yard touche u t three workers provided for each beneficiary in pass Lewis’ first I 5 gone in the game, a 27-yard interceji by Marcus Robere r connected withl 1-yard TD pass with! in the first period, lavens had 40 total): n’t cross midfield in arter. Testaverde, i ?d 25 of 40 for 217)1 i on the scoreboardw touchdown pass Jackson with 5:21 got id quarter, didn’t score again ii Je hit defensive! Arvie, who lined upi with a 1-yard touchdf port each beneficiary of Social Security in 1945. and by the year 2035, this number is expected ecrease to two workers per beneficiary. This ins that each worker will be shouldering more of burden to provide for each recipient, is frustrating to hear our national leaders talk uthow they would like to balance the budget, yet them do nothing to curb the growing portion of ral expenditures that Social Security occupies, awmakers in Washington, D.C. are more than ire of the crisis awaiting us. According to the 1.16 issue of Newsweek, after co-chairing the bipartisan entitlements commission, Sen. iKerrey, found that America will not be able to even the “crudest, bare-bones government” in near future unless Social Security and dicare are brought under control. And the result of the committee’s report? The ate will try to form another bipartisan committee ookat the issue sometime next year. On the surface, the Senate’s procrastination in :07 to go in thegaffi|d res sing the Social Security crisis may seem to m from a conflict of partisan interests. However, at the root of the issue lies not a partisan nflict, but a conflict in generations. More impor- itly, there is a misunderstanding in each genera- e said. "I gotmycham n’sattitude toward the welfare of the other. ; Unfortunately, it is only the older Columnist generations that have sufficiently voiced their worries. Because it will be we who pay the taxes and receive much less in return, our gener ation should be just as vocal in expressing our concern for Social Security The potential backlash of the elderly community against Social Security reform causes a politician’s knees td shake a little. In a country where our representatives are elected by the people, taking a stand on potentially divisive issues, such as Social Security, spells out reelection woes for those who have devoted their careers to politics. But the younger generations of Americans should be just as adamant in pressur ing their representatives to address the dilemma of Social Security now and not when it is political ly more convenient. In their quest for a financially secure future, how ever, young Americans should keep in mind what the elderly have contributed to this country in the past. No, they may not be around when Social Security is no longer functional. But they aren’t dead yet, and many have spent their lives paying a tax in which they were promised a benefits program in return. This issue is too Jenni Howard Senior economics and international studies major nee. ittitude is to workli: work hard I can gel I I did a good job. Sta) uilt my confidence. Each age group has equally important concerns, leyounger generations are concerned about what Iff said Wells made a ft ^ he Jeff of the taxes they pay today. The older gen- lct ! ations are concerned about what has happened to played a solid m ,#e taxes they paid yesterday, iaiti. “She dvdsomep it made a difference, ime of the show si 1 middle blockers handling.’’ Hi said that four mail a long tournament, its did a good jok h rough fatigue, played the same the majority of rbelli said. “Theystai igns of fatigue. But e job of believing : they’re tired butknt a n’t be tired.” * ^ critical to our nation’s livelihood to put off for a future generation to deal with. Rather than a bipartisan group, a bigenerational group composed of citizens repre senting all view points should be formed. If young Americans, while voicing their concern, showed Congress there could be a middle ground, perhaps it would be more eager to address the Social Security crisis. It may be difficult to get past the question of "What’s in it for me?” but it is necessary if we hope to curb the growth and complexity of Social Security before it becomes truly uncontrollable. At the root of the [social secu rity] issue lies not a partisan conflict, but a conflict in generations. en record three assise one game, said that games ag Missouri Kansas provided momentum help the win the next “We go e playing our best lys improve on kee; of play up,” Koop ould help us / when we play SMI WtAie S provides many nefits to users late in the secondli) Regarding Heather Pace’s Sept. nd Blalack, whoarei 'olumn. e Aggie Soccer Com] Vhen I read Pace’s article WCISI was concerned with she felt about CIS, in partic- the Help Desk workers, do agree that VM is not very to use. I personally think CIS should get rid of it. But tt concerns me is that if she is ingso much trouble with it, doesn't she switch to a dif- nt system to use e-mail? A&M three other system that are home games ^ better to use, and I am sure Help Desk would be kind to help switch her e-mail. Vhat annoyed me was her ement that CIS employees veno clue.” With the amount kstems CIS has to offer, it is ossible for every Help Desk ker to know everything. It Id be nice to have all the ers right away, but unfortu- Hy it might take a walk across ipus or an extra phone call to he information you want. Eric Nelsen Class of ’98 ilbrook uses [ulty reasoning maiding Shannon Halhrook’s '•10 column. lome response is required puse of the many false state- jits contained in Halbrook’s Jitnn. Jalbrook complains that “the jege Republicans is a bit too |ssive with those darn fliers.” s advisor to the College ttbliCans, I urged the CRs to tease the number of fliers let than to engage in whining tie Battalion about a problem [has become epidemic, s soon as we put up any fliers, tal extremists who do not pve in free speech destroy, jiceand remove our fliers. We Idistribute fewer fliers if people [stop removing them, palbrook speaks of “our racially condescending flier of two years ago.” Wrong! The fliers were not racist. They denounced racism, but they were misread by the media who reported parts of the fliers out of context. Another charge leveled is: “The College Republicans is well known for its ability to bury other groups by its sheer size. Democratic groups on campus, for instant, have never had a chance against the GOP juggernaut.” Twenty years ago I advised all 14 members of the College Republicans as we confronted hundreds of College Democrats. We decided then to present a bet ter product and to dramatically increase our publicity efforts. Richard Stadelmann Advisor to College Republicans Greek life provides little for members Regarding Sean McAlister's Sept. 12 column. I think McAlister should have thought again before he wrote his column about fraternities. He stated fraternities were formed to “focus primarily on scholarship, athletics, and brotherhood.” Obviously, times change because I have friends in frater nities and all they mention is the parties, not philanthropy or pledgeship. I guess since I do not plan to join a fraternity, I am not “a cut above the rest," as McAlister states. Being in a club does not make one person better than another. The truth of the matter is that fra ternities tend to separate them selves from non-Greeks. With such elitist attitudes, how can they expect to be looked at positively at A&M? I have one question for McAlister: If fraternities are so great, why does he need to write a recruiting speech in The Battalion? If I wanted to pay money to wear letters on my chest, I The Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 300 words or fewer and include the author’s name, class, and phone number. The opinion editor reserves the right to edit letters for length, style, and accuracy. Letters may be submitted in person at 013 Reed McDonald with a valid student ID. Let ters may also be mailed to: The Battalion - Mali Call 013 Reed McDonald Texas A&M University College Station, TX 77843-1111 Campus Mail: 1.111 Fax: (409) 845-2647 E-mail: Batt@tamvml.tamu.edu For more details on letter policy, please call 845-3313 and direct your question to the opinion editor. Just add spice to D run Columnist Shannon Halbrook Junior English major espite their similar names, family values and TV’s family hour have nothing in common. Maybe it’s time presi dential can didate Ross Perot tried to capitalize on it. Daniel Becker, a Republican running for a Georgia seat in the U.S. House of Representatives, made a commercial of which he was pretty proud — a graphic depiction of an aborted fetus — and sent it to a local TV station. The station chose to bury the ad in the late evening. But Becker didn’t want his message to be lost on the vote-rich elementary school market that has to go to bed at 8:30p.m., so he took his case to a federal appeals court. The court ruled in Becker’s favor, striking down a previous FCC ruling that allowed stations to determine for themselves when to air political campaign commer cials. The ruling reiterated the law that broadcast media stations are required to allow candidates for office “reasonable access” to radio and TV time, no matter how offen sive their commercials are. Well, good for Becker. Now he can show as many fetuses — or any other offensive things — as he wants to show on TV But presidential candidate Ross Perot can take advantage of this ruling better than any one. He has said repeatedly that his campaign battles will be waged over the airwaves. He’s aired five half-hour infomercials this year — he even announced his running mate on one. “This whole campaign... is Aod WAlf b BtaWSH. SjfFM, svcKm Soon© wwfl'S being run differently from other candidates,” the lucky VP choice, Pat Choate, has said. “Although many people make fun of these infomercials, Ross Perot can explain an issue so people can understand it.” Ah yes, his colorful graphs, charts and bumpkinisms make Perot a lot of fun. But, to actual ly hear his message, people have to watch him. According to Nielsen numbers, Perot’s first infomercial in 1992 captured the attention of 11.2 mil lion households and came in 32nd among 90 programs. But this year, his first infomercial hit rock-bot tom when it aired Sept. 1. It tied for 104th among 107 programs and was watched by fewer than 2 million households. Obviously, Perot needs to jazz up his message. And, thanks to Daniel Becker and this appeals court ruling, he can do it offensively. On Saturday night around 10:30, most Americans were either out getting plastered or in the din ing room playing Deluxe Scrabble with their families. But Perot was emoting his heart out in a taped infomercial entided “Made in the USA... Again.” It was neither the most exciting of infomercials nor the best of time slots. Some parts of the infomercial were almost as offen sive as an aborted fetus. An African-American fellow named Dick Toliver drew a pretty sick comparison between Ross Perot and Martin Luther King Jr. The trouble is Perot has no opinion on abortion or any other topic that doesn’t have to do with NAFTA, GATT, international trade ] or graphic patriotism. It’s hard to think of controversial visuals except charts with offensive colors. Perhaps Perot could show a blue- ; shirted, yellow-hard-hatted worker being bloodily and nastily emshed by a big piece of cardboard shaped like Mexico. At least people would watch. There’s something vaguely Monty Python-esque about the image. Perot may still be in the race, but only nominally. To advance his campaign, he has to take his love for seeing himself on TV and com bine it with a little offensive flair. Anything else fails to reflect the spirit of American politics. would buy a Texas A&M shirt. Those who are a cut above the rest are the ones smart enough to realize they do not need a hypocritical organization to be successful in life and have great friends. Matthew K. Zeve Class of ’99 Minor errs with parking solutions Regarding David Minor’s Sept. 13 column. I just thought that someone should let Minor know that we have a walkway for students to cross between East and West Campus when a train is passing through. Oops, I forgot, that involves a little extra walking so why don’t we just increase the local taxes to pay for a costly relocation of the railroad tracks? Also, carpooling is a great idea; however, implementing a carpool parking lot would require having manned booths at all entrances to ensure that carpools are being used. We have all seen the long lines for pay parking around the cam pus, this proposal would just add to that particular problem. Not to mention that car pool ing for college students is a diffi cult task unless one student doesn’t mind waiting a couple of hours for his or her carpool buddy to get out of class. Don’t get me wrong — David Minor had some excellent ideas (i.e. abolishing the on-campus driving), but sometimes we need to think about all of the factors involved. Justin Trice Graduate Student Columbus -visits Anterica Man lands on the moon Li OR courts black voters Editorial Roundup (AP)—A sampling of editorial opinion from Texas newspapers: San Antonio Express-News on state ethics policy: Gov. George W. Bush’s move to restrict lobbying activities of for mer employees puts him in a class by himself. He is the first Texas governor to do so. That shouldn’t be lost on state legislators. Bush last week announced he will limit the lobbying activities of staff members who leave his administration. The tough new policy also prohibits senior staff members from working in the governor’s office if their spouses are registered lobbyists. The governor joins a handful of state officials who also seem to understand that the perception of influence-peddling is unaccept able. House Speaker Pete Laney and Lt. Gov. Bob Bullock have similar policies in place. Surely other legislators can see the need to follow Bush’s lead. They now are free to work as lob byists as soon as they leave office. As such, the perception lingers that former lawmakers would enjoy greater access to the Statehouse. Does anyone really believe they don’t? The public, meanwhile, is left to wonder if the lobbyists will cross the line between a perceived conflict of interest and a real one. The Legislature in 1991 passed an ethics law barring former members of state boards and commissions and former high- level state agency employees from representing clients before their former boards or agencies during the first two years after leaving their state jobs. A glaring omission leaves law makers untouched. That should be remedied. Amarillo Globe-News on White House ethics: Why should Americans be sur prised any more when they read about scandals surrounding key players in the Clinton administra tion or in the president’s re-elec tion campaign? Richard Morris, the married architect of the president’s “family values” message, has quit amid allegations that he conducted a year-long affair with a Washington, D.C., hooker. Susan McDougal, convicted in the complicated Whitewater land deal involving President and Mrs. Clinton, now has been cited for contempt for refusing to tell a grand jury whether the president lied under oath during the Little Rock, Ark., trial. She plans to go to jail. The late Commerce Secretary Ron Brown was under investiga tion at the time of his death about his dealings with Vietnamese businessmen and whether they, too, violated federal ethics laws. Housing Secretary Henry Cisneros, once a rising political star in Texas, admitted to making payments to a former mistress. And we've had congressional investigations into matters relat ing to the White House travel office and the egregious mishan dling of FBI files by White House personnel. Yet polls continue to show that character doesn’t seem to matter in this election. In the eyes of mil lions of Americans, the economy concerns them most. Granted, the economy is doing well. But no president should embrace all the credit during good times, or accept all the blame dur ing the bad times. Meanwhile, the character issue continues to burble along virtual ly unnoticed. Well, we should notice it. We should be concerned — if not surprised — by the seemingly ever-growing list of ethical ques tions that continue to dog this White House. This, remember, is an adminis tration that promised us the cleanest ethical standard any of us ever has seen. Does the White House deserve the burning scrutiny it so far seems to be evading? Yes. The president himself invited it by making a vow he’s been unable to keep.