nday • March 23, 1998
The Battalion
m
\MPUS CONNECTION
ids’ corner
University day care center offers important services for faculty, students
Adam
Collett
columnist
s students
wete filing out
.of town for
l Break last
day, the foun-
ji was being laid
new child
Jenter on 1
il Drive just be-
he llniversity
men ts. When
^ntel opens in
1998, it will
Address one
standing need for nontraditional
5, While this represents a significant
[imefit on the part of the university,
[ and should be done.
:ording to Mary Miller, Associate
president for Administration, the
will offer full child care to approxi-
160 children six weeks to five years
. Tht center will likely be open from
to 6 p.m., though hours could be
ided with demand,
hough the center’s services will be
jble to all faculty, staff and students,
f acknowledges the cost may be out of
for ^ome staff and students.
le are going to offer state of the art
care," Miller said. “Rather than
aeejfing the minimum licensing
lards, we will be meeting full ac-
tation standards.”
mitigate the effects of the high
Miller indicates that scholarships
»e available.
\Ie don’t want this to be a center for
|en oI faculty and administrators only.”
iny Rosenthal, Coordinator for
Adult and Graduate Student Services in
Student Life, agrees with that goal. “We
want to work with Mary Miller to ensure
that students have a space over there,”
she said.
As coordinator, it is her job to look out
for the needs of student parents, older
students, and other nontraditional
groups.
Having only been on the job for a few
months, Rosenthal is spending most of
her time trying to assess what exactly
those needs are.
According to her initial findings, fore
most among those needs are social op
portunities, chances to meet other similar
students. Other needs include support
groups, peer tutoring, mentoring and of
course child care.
In the future, Rosenthal will continue
to bring helpful information about exist
ing services to the students she serves, but
also plans to help student parents find
each other to arrange cooperative baby
sitting, possibly through an Internet infor
mation exchange.
That’s when the social opportunities
become especially valuable, because the
parents can then get to know each other
and feel more comfortable exchanging
baby-sitting duties.
Organizations and departments can
supplement her efforts by being sensitive
to the needs of these students.
For example, a meeting scheduled for 3
p.m. might interfere with a parent picking
up a child from school. Similarly, a late-
night speaker or performance might force
a student to choose between attending
and putting his daughter into bed.
Rosenthal’s dream someday is to have
an adult or nontraditional student lounge
somewhere in the Student Center com
plex. Although it would have such practi
cal necessities as a computer, phone, re
frigerator and microwave, the main
purpose would be to give the students a
place to find and network with each other.
“It would be a living bulletin board.”
Rosenthal knows this vision is not like
ly to be fulfilled in the near future, despite
the fact A&M already provides more ser
vices for adult students than many other
universities. “For there to be a full time
staff person and a budget [for these ser
vices] is very fortunate.”
Our better-than-average commitment
thus far, however, is not a license to sit on
our laurels. Adult learners continue to be
come more of a presence on campuses
across the country. The child care center’s
predicted capacity was limited by the
amount of capital available to construct
the building and is not expected to even
come close to meeting the university
community’s need.
The University should identify other
capital oufiay funds and be prepared to use
them to expand the child care facility. Addi
tionally, the administration should support
staff efforts to expand the scope and nature
of nontraditional student services.
Finally, other departments and organi
zations can increase their awareness of
barriers that they may unintentionally in
clude in the format and timing of their
meetings and programs. Aggies, even the
Adam Collett is an educational
MRUS CONNECTION
brm rape board provides look into campus problem
Beverly
Mireles
columnist
Ith me, it’s same old,
same old. I am very
routine oriented,
try morning I do the same
ng: drag myself out of bed,
tshmy teeth, get dressed
i walk hurriedly to class,
already. Then on my way
j:k, I walk hurriedly
tugh the Commons, not
ig very sociable before
m. So it isn’t a huge sur-
se that l don’t really notice
ffhlng, or anyone, on my dash to get back to my
e warm bed.
Perhaps I should be more observant. The other
\r my roommate pointed out there were two new
?s on the Brazos County Crime stoppers billboard
phe Commons, bringing the total to eleven,
jit was just an offhanded comment, something to
lentioned and not really heard. It stuck with
|, however.
le billboard she was referring to houses the vis-
of men in all different shapes and sizes. They do
have one thing in common, though —- they have all
sexually assaulted someone or harassed them, and
are alluding prosecution.
Not exactly a cheerful thought, is it?
Knowing “the ways of the world,” it really
shouldn't have come as a surprise to me, with a
campus this big. Aggies don’t lie, cheat or steal, but
apparently some do rape.
Perhaps I had just been naive about the whole situ
ation. People had always told me I shouldn’t go walk
ing around campus by myself at night, but the hard
truth behind those remarks never really hit me until
my roommate brought my attention to the board.
At first, I felt a little lied to — as if A&M should
mention sexual assault in the campus brochure.
Quickly, I disregarded that senseless thought. Rape
happens everywhere, regardless how safe the cam
pus is, or how steadfast the moral code might be. But
why? Why does rape happen everywhere?
With all these questions surfacing, I decided to
find a few answers. Here are some of the disturbing
facts I found:
According to an obstetrical and gynecological
study done in 1993, sexual assault is the crime grow
ing most rapidly in America.
At least 20 percent of women, 15 percent of col
lege women and 12 percent of adolescent women
have experienced some form of sexual abuse or as
sault during their lifetimes.
About 20 percent of sexual assaults against
women are perpetuated by strangers, meaning the
other 80 percent are committed by friends, acquain
tances, and family members.
Now, as horrible as theses facts are, they get
worse. It always get worse before it gets better, right?
In a survey of male college students (not specifi
cally A&M), 35 percent anonymously admitted that
under certain circumstances they would commit
rape if they believed they could get away with it.
Exactly what circumstances lead to rape? “Well,
I’m bored, the only thing on TV is ‘Teen Jeopardy’
— I feel like raping someone.” Or maybe, “Hey,
she’s passed out, she won’t mind, or even remem
ber, a little forceful coercion.” Any man who tries
to rationalize the crime by saying the circum
stances forced him into it is more than ludicrous,
he is without conscience.
Unfortunately, rape victims aren’t helping the sit
uation. Only about 16 percent of victims report rape
to the police. Perhaps this is because their rapist was
a friend or relative, perhaps it is because they are
afraid people will think worse of them for getting
raped. Either way, rapists go without punishment
everyday because their victims are too traumatized
to report the crime.
Rape is not about sex, but power and control.
Rapists aren’t after the act of intercourse for pleasure.
Rather, rapists do it for the sole purpose of bolstering
their ego by bringing the victim to humiliation and
submission through means of brutalization.
In other words, men can be sexually assaulted as
well. One survey found at least half of convicted
rapists don’t care what sex their victim is, they would
rape both men and women.
Consequently, when it comes to sexual assault,
both men and women have to be very aware of their
surroundings and be prepared if the situation arises.
Innocence and naivete don't come in handy in
cases of sexual assault. Unfortunately, too many
people have had to learn that the hard way.
Beverly Mireles is a freshman microbiology major.
ATE OF THE UNION
line-item veto sets dangerous governmental precedent
I istory has
shown time
and again
dictatorships
letrimental to
feedom of the
dor’s subjects.
^en so-called
xevolent dicta-
’ are bad be-
;e they are
le targets for
er-hungry
-benevolent
s.
we it or hate it, bureaucracy works,
the over two-hundred-year history
e United States stands as living tes-
jnt to its effectiveness,
ne frarners of the Constitution
v allowing one person or “faction”
fin an excessive amount of power
ath to a free republic, so they cre-
a system of government charac-
ed by separation of powers and
:ks and balances,
ill Clinton is the first president in
>ry who threatens to end all that. To
Did the freedom Americans hold so
JL
Stewart
Patton
columnist
dear, the Supreme Court should declare
the line-item veto unconstitutional and
a dangerous move toward a near-dicta
torship where almost all governing pow
er is in the hands of the president.
This is how the line-item veto works:
• Congress passes a spending or tax
bill and sends it to the president.
• The president has five days to list
his objections to the bill.
• Congress then has thirty days to ac
cept the president’s decision or pass the
offensive provisions again by simple
majority vote.
• If Congress does pass the offensive
portions again, the president can veto
Congress’ action. Congress can override
the veto with a two-thirds vote.
The Supreme Court chose to hear
the case after U.S. District Judge
Thomas Hogan ruled that the line-
item veto wrongly “crosses the line be
tween acceptable delegations of rule-
making authority and unauthorized
surrender to the president of an inher
ently legislative function; namely, the
authority to permanently shape laws
and package legislation.”
Hogan said the line-item veto forces
the president to assume the role of a
legislator — a role for which the office of
president was not designed.
Proponents of the line-item veto
have lauded the program because it al
lows presidents to cut the “pork” from
the federal budget.
They believe the line-item veto stops
the usual presidential excuse: “Well, I re
ally didn’t want to subsidize the only
two watermelon farmers in Alaska, but
it was part of a larger essential bill.”
On the surface, it appears these con
clusions are well-founded, for since its
inception in 1996, Clinton has used the
line-item veto authority 82 times. Since
a two-thirds vote in Congress is a near
impossibility, the vast majority of the
cut items will not be restored.
How much effect does the elimina
tion of a few pork-barrel projects have
on the national budget? The estimated
$10 billion the country will save from
the cut items represents a whopping
one percent of the annual federal bud
get, and with a national deficit of al
most $5 trillion, the savings from these
cuts are only a teaspoon in the vast
ocean of government spending.
The much-ballyhooed line-item veto
is therefore not the knight in shining ar
mor of the national budget for which
presidents since George Washington
have been pining.
The line-item veto may allow a presi
dent to trim some unnecessary pro
grams, but the trimming has virtually no
effect on the federal budget as a whole.
The line-item veto bill does not allow
the president to really stop the most
massive of the massive spending pro
grams: entitlements.
Getting a handle on the nation’s true,
long-term spending problems are out
side of the scope of the line-item veto.
The aging population of America is now
entitled to benefits for which there are
insufficient funds. The most budget
eating of all benefit programs — Social
Security and Medicare — claim almost
two-thirds of all government spending
(nearly $600 billion), are impervious to
the line-item veto, and any president
who wants to be re-elected (or wants
even to be able to show his face in pub
lic) will not touch Social Security with a
10-foot pole.
Proponents of the line-item veto ar
gue many state governors have had the
authority for years, so the line-item
veto should be extended to the presi
dent. The taxing and spending meth
ods of the national government and
state governments, however, are so
fundamentally different a line-item
veto in the states may be tolerable
while it must not be tolerated in the
national government.
Additionally, the Constitution explic
itly describes the roles for each of the
branches of the national government
while stating much less stringent re
quirements of the states.
For nearly two years, the United
States has allowed the separation of
powers so vital to the freedom of our
nation to be blurred by tainting the
executive branch with the burden of
legislation.
The inconsequential sum saved by
the line-item veto is surely not worth
the dangerous precedent it sets for fur
ther power consolidation in the office of
the presidency.
Stewart Patton is a junior
sociology major.