Monday -June 30, 1997
The Battalion
ale of the Censory
fexas legislature aims to stifle offensive music
n
ecently, a rider attached to
the new appropriations bill in
the Texas legislature has
ausedsome unwarranted public
rutiny of a measure which actual-
^’I'does some good.
Rider #174 in Article Nine of the
ppropriations Act for the upcom-
igtwo years states in layman
^ :rms, that no state agency may
’invest its state-appropriated
jnds in o a business entity which
Ins 10 percent or more of a corporation
iat produces or records any song that de-
ribes, glamorizes or advocates offensive
abjects and actions.
The six qualifying aspects are as follows:
(1) Acts of criminal violence, including
mder, assault, assault on police officers,
malassault and robbery.
(2) Necrophilia, bestiality or pedophilia.
(3) Illegal use of a controlled substance.
imiisi (4) Criminal street gang activity.
Columnist
Len Callaway
Junior journalism major
(5) Degradation or denigration
of females.
(6) Violence against a particular
sex, race, ethnic group, sexual orien
tation or religion.
This rider is the first of its kind
and many questions have been
raised about its solvency, perti
nence, background and focus.
Some factions of the media al
ready have begun to conjure up all
sorts of issues and dialogues
about this matter, but the fact is that this
particular piece of legislation has ultimate
ly been misunderstood.
The argument has been made by people
in the entertainment industry that this £>iece
of legislation is a part of some conspiracy to
keep the people of Texas from listening to
music which some find offensive. They claim
that this measure is some sort of covert ac
tion to effectively censure the artists and
bands that perform and market their prod
ucts in Texas. This allegation is
at best inaccurate, and at
worst, it is irresponsible.
This one-paragraph rid
er has absolutely nothing
to do with what may be
produced, recorded or
purchased at will by the
people of the state of
Texas. It simply asserts
that the state will no
longer indirectly subsi
dize the manufacture or
distribution of this type
of material. However,
this stance reveals that
at some point in the
past, the state has indi
rectly, through one of its
agencies, invested in a com
pany responsible for the man
ufacture or distribution of
such music.
Obviously this piece
of legislation is helpful
▼ and appropriate for
: \ the people of the
state and their freedoms. The government of
the state of Texas has no business financially
contributing to the pockets of the companies
that produce music which contains material
mentioned earlier. Not because the music or
the expressions contained in the music are
wrong, but because a majority of the people
in the population would find the message of
the music offensive.
Anyone who considers themselves fans of
such music should be thankful that the gov
ernment will now not be able to exercise any
sort of financial control or political pressure
on the companies that produce this music.
The government should be congratulated for
finally taking the initiative to butt out. Had it
not, the next most logical step might have
been for the government to start taxing the
sale of such music above and beyond the nor
mal sales tax. The state government has effec
tively dissolved its relationships with the busi
nesses in question. This is a good move and
allows for the entire situation to be politically,
ethically and financially cleaner.
It is not acceptable for the government to
contribute financially to companies that pro
duce music deemed offensive by a majority
of citizens until a majority of the citizens feel
that this action by the legislature is appropri
ate. In other words, investment by state
agencies in a company that produces the
material in question will remain inappropri
ate until a majority of the voters no longer
take issue with the subject matter that the
music revolves around.
Both the state and federal government con
tribute to organizations such as the National
Association for the Advancement of the Hu
manities and the National Endowment for the
Arts. This action is legal and appropriate be
cause a majority of American citizens find some
cultural value or benefit to this type of art.
This nation and this state were founded
on the notion of democracy — majority
rules. If a majority of the population find
music like that of Marilyn Manson and
“gangsta rap” offensive, then this art will be
labeled offensive until such time as a majori
ty of the listening public no longer deems
this genre of entertainment offensive.
Drag reform warrants agenda revisions
hve:
tl
I
\ most serious and
A4 disturbing problem
^ ifacing our nation
Mayisthe rampant use
illegal drugs by young
Kople. One of the many
tograms which has been
Copied by educators and
^enforcement officials
isDA.R.E. (Drug Abuse
distance Education).
DA.R.E. has gained
toendous support
fomthose involved, but
itislitde more than a public rela-
fcns scheme hiding behind the fa
cade of an anti-drug program.
Recently many cities, including
Houston, are beginning to take a
tardsecond look at DA.R.E.’s ef
fectiveness and whether it is worth
teexpense to donors and taxpay-
stsalike. Critics cite recent re
search which shows that D.A.R.E.
las little or no long-term effect on
1 students’ attitudes and behaviors
toward alcohol and drugs.
D.A.R.E. began in 1983 under
le direction of Los Angeles police
'oil chief Daryl Gates. Since then it has
(town into a vast international or-
Sf ganization used in 52 percent of
t* school districts in 50 states and 13
Columnist
Robby Ray
Senior speech
communications major
foreign countries. Ac
cording to Glen Levant,
D.A.R.E. executive di
rector, at least $750 mil
lion is being spent by
governments and pri
vate donations each
year. This is money
which would be better
spent on other, more ef
fective programs.
Police and educators
praise the program, but
science is unable to jus
tify their confidence. Studies in at
least five states and Canada have
failed to demonstrate any signifi
cant decrease in drug use as a result
of the program. Thomas T. Walsh,
research and statistics administra
tor for the South Carolina Depart
ment of Alcohol and Other Drug
Abuse Services has compiled sever
al of these studies on the Internet.
“Current consensus is that
D.A.R.E. does significantly and
positively effect student attitudes
toward alcohol, tobacco and other
drugs,” Walsh said on the first page
of his Web site, “but the findings
generally indicate that exposure to
D.A.R.E. does not significantly re
duce actual use of those drugs.”
The United States General Ac
counting Office agrees: “There is
little evidence so far that
[D.A.R.E. and other programs
studied] have reduced the use of
drugs by adolescents.”
Part of the problem may be with
D.A.R.E.’s curriculum. It is set by a
25-member board of directors in
Los Angeles and based on psycho
logical theory from the ’70s called
Values Clarification, now regarded
as ineffective. The curriculum has
only been changed once, nonethe
less, only to receive more federal
funding. Some studies, which fea
ture student interviews, suggest
that an approach focused more on
student discussion instead of lec
tures would be more effective.
What may be even worse is that
some evidence shows that D.A.R.E.
might even increase drug use. Uni
versity of Indiana researchers E.
Wysong and R. Aniskiewicz explain.
In a written report, Wysong and
Aniskiewicz said, “The finding of
significantly high hallucinogen use
among the D.A.R.E. group raises
the possibility that drug education
programs may increase student cu
riosity about drugs and lead to ear
lier and greater drug experimenta
tion,” they said in their report. This
finding could be due to the D.A.R.E.
tactic of teaching that kids have a
“right not to use drugs,” implying
that they have a right to try them.
Patrolman Karl Geib, a Maine
D.A.R.E. officer, takes this position.
“I tell kids they can smoke dope
if they want to, as long as they con
sider the consequences,” Geib
said. This method of teaching is
undermined by political and
entertainment figures pushing for
the legalization of marijuana. This
mixed message is dangerous, es
pecially in light of recent research
showing that pot is often a “gate
way” drug, leading to use of harder
drugs such as cocaine and heroin.
D.A.R.E. is not without its good
points. It is a phenomenal public
relations tactic for police depart
ments nationwide. It shows kids a
police officer in a positive, non
threatening manner and allows
them to form positive opinions
about authority figures. Although
this is an admirable goal, it is not
the purpose of D.A.R.E., and could
be accomplished by a simpler, less
expensive program that would not
steal funding away from anti-drug
programs that really work.
Political duties of
lieutenant governor
evade job description
Columnist
Jack Harvey
Junior economics major
T he announced
retirement of
Lieutenant
Governor Bob Bul
lock from public
service might bring
an end to an era in
Texas government.
The powers that he
and predecessors in
his office have
wielded were astro
nomical considering the low
profile they have maintained
throughout the years.
Despite the popular image
and myth of a governor run
ning the state from behind
closed doors, those who know
agree the lieutenant governor
is the man with the real power.
People only complain about
“the man” because they do not
know who he is. Personal re
search has proven conclusively
that “the man” is none other
than Bullock. It must be
known that “the man” is not a
machination of the oppressed
masses — he is real and he is
in the Texas Senate.
The lieutenant governor,
president of the senate, chair
man of the legislative budget
board, the prince of darkness
is the most powerful man in
Texas. Although few know who
he is, none are immune from
his power and influence.
A little background infor
mation is in order. Under the
Texas Constitution, the powers
of the lieutenant governor are
sketched out with a lot of room
to grow. He is the president of
the senate and governor pro-
tempore when the big man is
not around.
The real power of the office
is not included explicitly in
the constitution. The docu
ment does, however, state the
senate, of which the lieu
tenant governor is president,
shall pass rules at the start of
every legislative session to in
struct exactly how business is
to be conducted.
One of the powers perenni
ally given to the lieutenant
governor is to rule on all par
liamentary questions. This one
power has given Bullock con
siderable control in the senate.
He decides who gets to talk
and for how long. He gets to
decide how and when a vote is
taken. He decides when to take
a coffee break. These are con
siderable powers to delegate to
one man.
Another power, and this is a
kicker, is the setting up of all
standing and special commit
tees in the senate, their chair
persons and the members of
these committees. All bills
must pass through a commit
tee before it gets to the floor to
be voted on by the whole sen
ate. Most bills never make it
through the committee it is as
signed — never if the
lieutenant governor is
against it.
This effectively
eliminates the power
of individual senators,
handing it all over to
the president. People
elect senators from
their home districts to
represent their inter
ests to the rest of the
state. The reality, however, is
quite different.
The lieutenant governor
also has the ability to estab
lish the order in which bills
are to be considered. All thou
sands of bills considered in
the senate every year cannot
be seriously contemplated,
and this is a way for the lieu
tenant governor to bury those
not to his liking.
The two powers mentioned
that are granted by special
rules every year are consider
able, but not the end of the
list. Over the years, lieutenant
governors have used their
power to gain more power.
Knowing these powers could
be taken away from them, they
strived to gain powers granted
by statutory law pushed
through the system by their
perennial powers.
Arguably the most impor
tant of the statutory powers is
the influence the lieutenant
governor has on state expendi
tures. The five-member leg
islative budget board recom
mends a fiscal plan to the
legislature every other year,
and it is generally passed with
most of the major parts intact.
The lieutenant governor is the
chairman who also appoints
all of the members.
One can imagine the inher
ent power in this position. The
fact that he proposes a budget,
and then carefully guides it
though the senate is a reality
most people do not know. The
potential for power abuse is
great, but the power of the in
dividual voter and his or her
representative is frighteningly
little in comparison.
The lieutenant governor,
furthermore, also is a member
of the legislative audit commit
tee which determines whether
there has been any misappro
priation in the budget or any
sort of ethics violations such as
conflicts of interest. This is a
like the wolf in sheep’s clothing
guarding the flock.
The lieutenant governor has
grown so powerful that the
senate that granted his powers,
ironically, is powerless, to take
them back.
Perhaps the election of a
new lieutenant governor will
mark a shift in the tide of po
litical power back to the peo
ple if the voters are adamant
about it.
Mail Call
Air bag technology
takes liberal stance
response to General Franklin’s
Iune26 column:
Franklin’s column on air bags
is just another example of the
bias in the media in its infancy.
As I expected, this liberal ide
alism comes from the intense
exposure to the “academia” envi-
tonment which has no idea how
teal life works.
Only “reporter types” could
be naive enough to believe that
^creasing technology on these
3 irbags is going to cost only
^8. Perhaps this is what
Semens will charge the auto
mobile companies, but let’s not
forgot one major thing: What
will the auto companies charge
the public?
We’re talking more like hun
dreds, maybe thousands of dollars.
The money, however, is not
the point.
The real issue is the constant
“nannying” of the federal gov
ernment that the Republican
majority elected in 1994 is trying
to eliminate.
Why do liberals insist upon in
vading people’s privacy in order
to save them from themselves.
If Franklin had listened to
the auto industry a few years
ago, he would have found out
that air bags will succumb to
killing the very people they are
trying to save.
Liberals were warned about
this far in advance, but it seems
their irrational, emotional and
good intentions got the best of
them once again.
Here’s what I propose: Air
bags should be equipped with
an on and off switch so con
sumers can make the choice
whether they want to kill their
children or not.
We don’t need more govern
ment mandates on how to live
our lives.
Furthermore, the more we
micromanage lives, the more
we interfere with the essential
liberties granted us by God (via
the Constitution).
Always remember what Ben
jamin Franklin said: “He that
would give up essential liberties
in the pursuit of safety, deserves
neither liberty, nor safety.”
Peter Winter
Class of’89
The Battalion encourages letters to the ed
itor. Letters must be 300 words or less and in
clude 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 Mc
Donald with a valid student ID. Letters may also
be mailed to:
The Battalion - Mail Call
013 Reed McDonald
Texas A&M University
College Station, TX
77843-1111
Campus Mail: 1111
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.