Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (April 6, 1999)
T -Aivru LD • Tuesday, April ti. ange 11 si, ope lattalion — Opinion Page 9 • Tuesday, April 6, 1999 Insurance Adj ustment Legislation allowing reconsideration of hasty claims deserves passage Christian ROBBINS lore’s reputation on shaky ground with questionable claims year was 1 r of the first™ ;e. He was sij five earned play and ft] iy Ivan l!( ing reach it. he was knapas been appar- g out. ht en ' for a long time nd a wald^ 11 A! Gore, vice homer, tie® ent °f die Unit- h a walk ,s ll >e Ini :h of whom‘ffPopsicle — cold ■ ■tiff. The expia tion for why Gore feo personality Sideki>y final| y have me to light in the M GABRIEL RUENES/The Battalion E ver wonder why there are no door-to-door snowmobile salesmen in Texas? It could be because it hardly ever snows in Texas, or maybe no one is home when they come a knockin’, but whatever the reason, it would probably be pretty hard to get any intelligent Texan to buy a snowmobile. But imagine that this is not a regular sales man; this salesman is so smooth that he could sell a Big Mac to Dave Thomas. He guarantees he has prior knowledge of the weather, and though it is the first week in April, he assures you a snowstorm is going to come in the next couple of days. Next, he thoroughly convinces you that purchasing a $2,000 snowmobile from him would be a wise investment. Lucky for you, when the next couple of days pass and no snowstorm arrives, Texas con sumers have the right to return their $2,000 snowmobiles. In fact this scenario could never really happen in Texas because the law requires that business es including but not limited to salesmen, real es tate companies and car dealers disclose pertinent information to customers and give them reason able time to back out of contracts that may have been made in haste. It is only fair, so it should be no surprise that fair practice and consumer pro tection rules apply to most industries, but it should appall many that there is at least one in dustry that does not have any obligation to pro tect consumers. The industry that has no obligation to be open and honest about their practices is the in surance industry. Finally, thanks to Representative Senfronia Thompson, a democrat from Houston, House bill 2710 has been filed with the Texas legislature that would require insurance companies to dis close all relevant claims information to claimants and allow customers 30 days to reconsider hasty claim settlements. The purpose of this bill seems extremely logi cal. Elected legislators should agree that their constituents be treated fairly and be aware of all possibilities in order to make educated decisions. Why then would this bill be defeated in a body of legislatures elected by the public? What could keep this bill, obviously intended to keep con sumers from being ripped off, from passing? The answers are the infamous insurance lob byists, of course. Insurance companies spend millions of dollars lobbying so that they can con tinue to easily collect premiums, yet make it a mini-miracle to collect on a claim. If this legisla tion does not pass through the legislature, or is simply tabled indefinitely, Texans should deduce that this bill failed not because this law will not assist consumers but because their elected legis lators were too busy enjoying free lunches and large campaign donations courtesy of the insur ance industry lobby. If there are no unethical practices occurring, what exactly do these insurance companies have to hide? Dan Lambe, executive director of Texas Watch, put it best when he wrote, “The legisla tion simply holds insurance companies and their representatives to the same legal standards that apply to people who sell cars, real estate and ap pliances, or ‘those who sell snowmobiles door- to-door.’ Should business standards for insurance companies be any less?” Christian Robbins is a junior speech communi cations major. ;m. Mark PASSWATERS coach st few weeks; he is too busy inventing ^ncierful devices to develop one. kP) — Tl In the last several weeks. Gore has ouncedMcund himself well behind in polls for ’Vorld Indoce 2000 presidential election. He has stu as bothme no closer than 14 points to Gov. ?orge W. Bush and has even seen his o coachcad for the Democratic nomination slip, in undefeo'. an attempt to buoy his campaign, ast year, Me and his people have made an at- al indoor mpt to show the nation how neat a oals, poidlyjAl really is. Bill Gates, are you sure you invented the Side|indows? Lockheed, did your “Skunk af 14 seas- J acted the_ Works” really develop Stealth technolo gy? Colonel Sanders, did you actually come up with that original recipe? Beware, because Albert Gore, super genius, is on the prowl. The walking cure for insomnia has apparently come up with some other goodies. If an issue is getting attention, then Gore had something to do with it. Just ask him. All this started when Gore told CNN on Mar. 9 that he was the man “respon sible for the creation of the Internet,” — a very bold assertion and news to peo ple at the Pentagon and Stanford yniver- sity. What Gore neglected to mention was that the concept for the Internet came about in the late 1960s as a device for communication after a nuclear exchange with the Soviet Union, and two engi neering professors at Stanford started working on the civilian version in the 1970s. The attendance roles show no “Gore, Albert,” in either place at those times. Thankfully, the origin of the Thighmas- ter is not a hot topic, or the American people might be subjected to a visual image that could scar them for life. William Kristol, editor of the Weekly Standard, said “People do have the sense that Gore is conceited and full of himself.” Unfortunately, there is good reason for that. Several other comments made by the vice president show that he is, at the very least, shameless. Folks might want to start bolting down their possessions because if Gore sees something that he can use to his advantage, he will. He has claimed that he and his wife Tipper were the models for the novel and movie Love Story. The author, Erich Segal, said the model for the male lead was Gore’s col lege roommate, actor Tommy Lee Jones. Gore was the model for the spineless rich kid with the domineering father. Gore has also claimed that he “served with distinction in Vietnam.” While he was in the country. Gore was a writer for Stars and Stripes. If making one’s bed every morning quali fies as serving with distinction, then Gore is certainly correct. Comments like these show that A1 Gore is willing to use anything he can to his advantage. This does not separate him from other politicians; what does, however, is using personal tragedy as a tool. In 1996, Gore made an impassioned speech at the Democratic National Con vention, attacking the tobacco industry. Blaming them for the death of his sister, who died of cancer in 1984, Gore said, “I will fight them ... until I draw my last breath.” Words from his mouth brought tears to the eyes of the soccer mommies in the crowd. When Gore ran for president in 1988, an election where his was out charisma- ed by the human statue, Michael Dukakis, that same mouth told tobacco farmers that “I’ve hoed it ... I’ve sprayed it ... and I’m with you all the way.” CNN’s video showed the speaker was indeed Gore, with more hair and less wrinkles, backing the tobacco farmers — four years after his sister’s death. Oops. When A1 Gore gets up on the podium and says that you can count on him to continue what Bill Clinton has started, believe it. While he has not taken part in deep-breathing exercises with interns in the Oval Office, he is of equally lousy character. Kissing up to Buddhist monks for money and making fund-raising calls from White House phones can almost be chalked up to politics as usual. The American people should also be ashamed if they allow this man to be come president. Dan Quayle could not spell “potato.” Apparently, Mr. Gore cannot spell “decency.” Mark Passwaters is an electrical engineering graduate student. MAIL CALL a Af Xl iditor’s column still * s Sio excuse for photo lay,” the: Aaron Meier’s April 5 column was JSt as irresponsible as his decision s plays tho run the picture of the custodial crew Reunion Cleaning up the remains of William jlerry Jr. last week. His column was lot an “en masse response," but an gotistical attempt to show how he is Bit and the vast majority of this Uni- 2/V 'ersity is wrong. / I Equating picture such as the father peping over the body of his murdered on evokes an emotional, personal re- ponse. This picture does not evoke j (] t I 1056 emotions. The one emotion that * does cause for the viewer is that of ftmplete disgust. vft, L/?il Show ' n S the custodial crew wash- ' 'CAinl up this young man’s remains is cal- ^ „ lous and shows disregard for the life . t-fj Ihat ended on that spot. Pictures of a J Jung man being mourned by his fa- ■er makes the situation one that any ^|man can feel. This photograph 'dt: Hfk® 2 William Berry into a statistic. ■ Meier, kindly join us in reality. It is . jncliii eviden1: frorn Battalion’s handling of the Vail tragedy to this event, that irt and |ou have no interest in helping the stu dent body. You are interested in draw ing attention to your paper. . Alan Wilson Class of ’01 Former candidate encourages turnout Howdy! My name is John McFate, and I had the honor of running for the position of junior yell leader this spring. To all the Aggies our campaign crew has had the privilege of meeting this past week, we want to say thank you for allowing us to be part of your lives. It was an experience we will cherish forever. However, the only disappointment through all of this was that the out come of this election was decided by 9400 Aggies. That is less than 22% of the stu dent body. It is a fact that we care deeply about our school, the spirit of the 12th Man, the many traditions we hold dear, and the future of Texas A&M. Go talk to the candidates, find out who they are, and make an in formed decision. This Wednesday and Thursday there are two run-off elections that everyone can vote in: one for junior yell and the other for student body president. Both of these positions represent the entire student body when elected, that’s 100%, not just the 22% that elect them. Thanks and gig ’em. John McFate Class of ’01 Right to bear arms vital as free speech Brendan GUY I t is amazing that when it comes to defending the First Amendment no position is seen as too extreme, but when peo ple try to grant the same protection to the Second Amendment they are viewed as crazed gun nuts. The Second Amend ment is just as much a part of the Bill of Rights as any of the other amendment and it deserves both the same respect and devotion to its defense that the other amendments re ceive. The Second Amendment was designed to guarantee the rights of individuals to possess firearms, no other interpretation of it makes any sense. Just look at the historical context of this amendment, it is part of the Bill of Rights, a series of amendments inserted into the Constitution for the explicit purpose of protecting individuals and states from exces sive national governmental power. The Bill of Rights guarantees certain protections to indi viduals; free speech, right to property, right to trial by jury, why would this one amendment differ from the rest? The Second Amendment, like all of the rest of the Bill of Rights, exists to guarantee individual rights. One would think the phrase, “the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed,” would have already made this sufficiently clear. The Second Amendment still guarantees an important and necessary right for all Americans, because even if this country is safe from invasion, we are not safe from crim inals. Yes, there is a police force that is sup pose to protect citizens from criminals, but even at their best the police are still danger ously overworked and undermanned. The consequence of this is that police protection never seems to be around when you need it — but strangely enough is always around when you are going 53 in a 40. And that is the police at their best, as for them at their worst, just think of Rodney King and Mark Fuhrman and all the other inci dents of police brutality and corruption that are constantly in the news. There are neigh borhoods in this country where people are understandably more afraid of the police than of the criminals. And even with honest cops who are trying their best to protect us, it is simply not going to be possible for them to be everywhere at once. The American people cannot reasonably rely upon the police to always protect them, so they are going to have to be able to protect themselves. That is where the Second Amendment comes into play. Gary Kleck, a criminologist at Florida State University, points out that firearms are used against criminals approximately 2.5 million times annually. This is a rate that is anywhere from three to five times the rate of guns being used in crimes and approximately 90,000 times the rate of guns being involved in fatal accidents. However, fatal accidents involving guns make up less than one percent of all fatal ac cidents. The most common cause of death by guns in this country is suicide (54 percent of all firearm deaths) something which is tragic but can hardly be blamed on the guns. Nor does possession of guns indicate a high level of gun-related crimes, just look at Switzerland where every household is required by law to possess an automatic weapon and gun-relat ed crimes are almost nonexistent. Indeed an armed citizenry can be a power ful deterrent against crime as is demonstrated by Texas and Florida which have both seen their murder and crime rates fall since they instituted concealed weapon laws. And as for the claim that tight gun control laws are the best way to reduce crime just look to Britain which has incredibly tight gun control and also higher assault, burglary and robbery rates than the supposedly crime infested Unit ed States. This is not to say there is no place for rea sonable gun control laws, the Constitution does allow for limited regulation, as long as those laws do not prevent law abiding re sponsible citizens from being able to defend themselves. The Second Amendment enables us to protect ourselves, and because of that it is just as necessary today as it was in 1791.
