;mber 27
Qi
iii
e Battalion
o PINION
Page 9 • Monday, September 27, 1999
Running from responsibility
ulty money management
rdens students, government
tory, esidents
halice of Austin
the fir;HV.and Balti-
noi ? are about
on tlic|>nd out Un-
1 strei ; i e Sam ’ s pock-
net live:I s liee d a little
J.S. 0] Jningback.
in the » tudents
nmade* km - their
i that w ent '* oan Payments after grad
er moB® on ’ li ke Ji nim y Hoffa from
t prove
weaitowlands construction work-
■ will soon have to pay up fol-
i ^ lowing a recent government ini-
/ ttative. It was only a matter of
ictorv B e de ^ ore dle government
' . realized its generosity was being
^■en advantage of by students
. .. .■o abused the system and de-
1 ™Wed to send them to “sleep with
the fishes. ”
trlLfiBPerhaps the problem with
overdue loan accounts lies in the
V; government’s approach to hand-
. an " ingout money.
1 ™^ , Wchanges are needed to the
itco W* lc j ent .i oan S y S tem, a system in
puI !.:fr c h abuses lead to debts for-
la; mt r students do not want to be-
lnteed gir paying.
point: ■ The cos t 0 f higher education in
the United States is rising at a
much higher rate than inflation,
^iid student loans are often the
only answer for students who
have the motivation but not the
Sutton, financial means to attend college,
le U.S. t® [ n a move which should have
i 2 poi® e en considered long ago, the
^ U.S. Department of Education
i to
elieved
f being
anted to
and Treasury has targeted the
cities of Austin and Baltimore for
a campaign of television and ra
dio ads intended to increase
awareness of the need to repay
student loans and clear away the
massive debt.
The two cities were picked be
cause they have large numbers of
college-aged adults with out
standing student loans.
According to the U.S. Depart
ment of Education and TYeasury,
almost 26,000 Austin residents
owe money for student loans re
sponsible for $128 million in loan
debts, while 88,000 Baltimore res
idents owe $294 million.
To avoid such widespread loan
abuse in the future, a preventative
change is needed to the system.
To ensure money is being tun
neled to the right sources, stu
dents who apply for a loan to
cover school costs should have
their bills for room, board, books
and tuition sent directly to the
government for payment.
This guarantees the money
will go toward students’ college
educations, while new DVD play
ers will have to wait.
The government’s crackdown
on loan-dodgers is a result of too
many mismanaged accounts.
Too many students abuse the
privilege of loans and use them to
pay for parking tickets and non-
academic matters, sometimes not
even graduating. These students
are too immature to realize
that money comes with a price —
prompt payment, with interest,
after graduation.Even students
who take out loans and graduate
often find themselves beginning
their new lives with large debts
hanging over their head.
America is not seeing a good
return on its investment when
students who take out loans must
be hunted down for repayment.
This extra cost is not factored into
loan debt. »
There is more than $24 billion
in unpaid student loans in the
United States, accounting for al
most 14 percent of the total $300
billion the government has doled
out in loans since 1966, the year
student loans began. More than
half (about 54 percent) of 18- to
24-year-olds in the United States
still live at home with their par
ents, due in large part to the rising
costs of higher education, stagna-.
tion of wages and the increase in
housing costs.
RICHARD HORNE/The Battalion
However, with a better ap
proach to management of student
loans, some students who have
the will but not the way can go to
college and get a degree. Surely,
burdened parents everywhere
would agree.
Jeff Webb is a senior
journalism major.
l
T
He the Hi
kkirot:
lest
m'M
fis®-'
Surplus goes bust
Congress should use
some common sense
and revert to its
frugal ways.
hen it comes to budget
ing, the U.S. Congress is
the equivalent of a fresh-
g wore:«an with a credit card.
Dit the®A person cannot spend money
death E»y do not have. This past sum-
irveyl mcr, the Republican-controlled
he felt Bngress spouted off about the
ig him federal government’s budgetary
same In plus being sizable enough to
teanh'Btrrant tax cuts.
which® However, there is one tiny flaw with this argu-
/ictorie®nt: The surplus does not exist. Congress’ claim
se ot that the federal government will amass a $3 trillion
ove Hi budgetary surplus within the
ie us hwxt 10 years is a pipe dream
■ nothing more than a ruse to
appease the deficit-weary
' Bnerican public.
■ The existence of any sur
plus at this point is based on
ige 1 creative accounting, misguided
f the r:| Grecas h n g and mass quanti-
, these® 8 of spin-doctoring,
a offl- : i lnste ad of giving away mon-
, defer,m that may or may not materi-
0 j n£ falize, Congress should use
t^elme common sense and revert to its frugal ways.
■ The accrual of a $3 trillion surplus within 10
,,, fears is laughable. The White House’s Office of
c . .. . Management and Budget (OMB) and theCongres-
. . 10 p sional Budget Office (CBO) have laid out an improb-
nn ^2’’ able set of circumstances to achieve this surplus.
ve . n M First, they assume the current economic prosper-
a ltV : iU will roll forward, uninterrupted, for the next 10
§ e t0 “ ®ars. It does not take John Maynard Keynes to fig-
U P P fl lure out this is an unrealistic forecast.
Macroeconomic trends rarely go along with such
irrational forecasts. Also, the OMB and CBO assume
pngress will be able to continue its slash-and-burn
approach to cfownsizing the federal budget for the
eapor, next |g y ears _
jlay. if sizable cuts do not occur at a constant rate the
nues i; budgetary surplus shrinks exponentially.
1 The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities con
cludes that if Congress is able to maintain its spend-
g at present parameters, the $3 trillion surplus
ill in reality be a mere $112 billion.
Not surprisingly, even that amount is in danger
f disappearing, as Congress ended up overspend-
g by $21 billion last year and $30 billion this year.
Considering these startling facts, ramifications of
Iny federal tax cut would be horrendous.
' the
ne
he
The Republican plan has the potential of inflating
the stock market even further, sending unstable eco
nomic growth through the roof.
This would counteract the Federal Reserve
Board’s attempts to slow down the runaway econo
my, forcing them to raise interest rates.
This potential series of events would mirror eeri
ly actions taken during in “Reaganomics” era of the
1980s. Despite objections from financial analysts.
Congress is making tax-cut legislation a priority.
Republicans pushed through a $792 billion tax
cut last week that primarily rewards the rich and
corporations. President Clinton promptly vetoed the
bill, saying “it is wrong for Medicare, wrong for So
cial Security, wrong for education
and wrong for the economy.”
As reported by CNN, Clinton
asserts that “At a time when
America is moving in the right di
rection, this bill would turn us
back to the failed policies of the
past.”
Federal Reserve Chair Alan
Greenspan recognizes this paral
lel and spent the summer implor-
ing Congress not to take any fur
ther legislative action.
With Clinton’s veto, the spin doctors of the Re
publican Party wasted no time in tearing into the
president, portraying him as the bad guy.
Senate Majority Leader Tyent Lott, R-Miss., asid,
“I regret the president has stolen this tax cut from
working American families.”
“I say shame on the president for turning his
back on the people,” Rep. J.C. Watts, R-Okla.', said.
“If we can’t give American people some of their
money back in an economy like this, when can we
give them their money back?”
As the saying goes, the road to hell is paved with
good intentions. And while its intentions are some
what admirable. Congress is being irresponsible and
downright reckless by supporting this legislation.
It is putting its own political motives ahead of
the interests of the American people.
It is safe to say the that American people are
happy with the way the economy is humming along
currently.
A tax break would be nice, but it is not required.
There is absolutely no need to rock the boat and
feel generous. If something is not broken, do not try
to fix it.
David Lee is a junior economics major.
MAIL CALL
>6 Acti'L
,ccessc'|:
JCARPOOL”a
“"helpful service
11 would like to congratulate
IaRPOOL (Caring Aggies “R”
Protecting Over Our Lives)
founder Jeff Schiefelbein and his
jll( staff on an incredible job.
■ They have seen their vision
■ought to fruition and worked
) hard to make CARPOOL a suc-
T Ct^'W 58 - CARPOOL volunteers truly
gl^lfare about the safety of other
Aggies, giving unselfishly of
their time and efforts to making
sure that others make it home
safely.
This is the best idea I have
ever encountered. I encourage
everyone to take advantage of
this service.
Thank you to those who make
it all possible. CARPOOL and its
members are an incredible dis
play of Aggie spirit.
Tania Fongemie
Class of’00
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: battletters@hotmail.com
Hate literature uses faulty logic
to entrap readers in racist views
CHRIS
HUFFINE$
A certain
respect
must be
granted to
writers of hate
literature.
Admittedly,
their ideas
and values are
repugnant,
but they do an amazing job mak
ing it sound reasonable.
Unwary readers can quickly
find themselves sucked into a
world of white supremacy. Re
spect should be granted for a job
well done, even a job that should
not be done.
However, the unwary must be
made aware of the wool being
pulled over their eyes or they
will fall prey to the evils of
prejudice and bigotry.
Hate literature employs
three basic strategies to lure in
the ignorant and incautious.
The first strategy employed is
the “chain of reasonable state-,
ments.”
Much like the “Wheel of
Fortune,” where almost every
segment awards money and
only two are “Bankrupt”
spaces, the “chain of reasonable
statements” is a long list of seem
ingly reasonable statements any
one would agree with.
The last link in the chain,
however, is the “Bankrupt”
space, the hook yanked and set
in the craw of any reader not
alert to the goals of the insidious
writer at work.
For example, a recent pam
phlet littered across campus at
tempts to explain how convicted
Jasper killer John King came out
of prison with his racist views.
King was a nice boy before he
went to prison — a reasonable
statement.
King hated African-Americans
after he came out of prison, ap
parently because of his exposure
to racist prison gangs. Again,
these sound reasonable.
Then comes the hook. The
pamphlet says King actually
came out of prison a racist be
cause he was exposed to to “the
reality of Black nature,” not be
cause of his membership in a
prison gang.
This unexpected statement is
sure to hook readers, if for no
other reason than curiosity.
The pamphlet goes on to ex
plain that the “reality of Black
nature” includes homosexual
rape, government apathy and
racial inferiority.
According to the pamphlet,
racist gangs are merely looking
out for good, genteel whites.
These last assertions are obvi
ously bigoted, but the “chain of
reasonable statements” has al
ready hooked readers by the time
they read them.
The second strategy of bigots
is known as a false dichotomy,
forcing listeners to choose be
tween two options when there
are many more available — if
one is not A, one must be B.
Unwary readers can
quickly find them
selves sucked into
the world of white
supremacy.
A recent example of a false di
chotomy used at Texas A&M was
the firestorm following the com
ments at last year’s Bonfire by
former A&M football player Dan
Campbell.
Whatever the appropriateness
of Campbell’s comments, the
University’s response was pretty
reasonable.
But when Westboro Baptist
Church of Topeka, Kan., began
its hate campaign against gays
and A&M, it entered the arena of
hate literature.
Westboro’s press release stat
ed, “[Texas A&M] President [Ray
M.] Bowen and [A&M football]
coach [R.C.] Slocum made Dan
Campbell grovel before the fags
because he exercised his First
Amendment free-speech right.
Dan Campbell showed cow
ardice and weakness yielding to
fag pressure.”
While this statement is re
volting to those not blinded by
hate, it does serve the illustrate
a point. Westboro obviously be
lieves any organization not en
gaged in its quixotic quest to
purge the earth of homosexuals
“has allowed fags to take it over.”
With this strategy, there is no
middle ground.
There is no gray area. Listen
ers are forced to choose between
stances against Westboro, an ob
viously unattractive alternative
given Westboro’s tendency to be
rate them, or with Westboro,
which will support the listener
and treat him or her well.
For weak-willed listeners or
those who feel friendless, even
an approach as heavy-handed as
Westboro’s can be effective.
This strategy is eerily effective
when employed in a less flam
boyant manner. All the writer has
to do is get the reader to agree he
or she is not A, then introduce
the false dichotomy.
The reader is not A, therefore
he or she must be B.
And all too often, B is hatred,
bigotry and prejudice.
The final strategy used by big
ots could be titled “We’re Just
Looking Out For Ourselves.”
This strategy is effective not
because it pulls people into prej
udice but because it makes preju
dice seem almost reasonable.
What could be wrong with de
fending oneself?
The problem is that no one is
attacking the hate writers, physi
cally or less tangibly. What is
there to defend against?
To create a threat, hate writ
ers inflate the dangers of an ex
cess of society, a favorite being
political correctness.
Like McCarthy and the Com
munists, bigots blow a minor is
sue out of proportion to justify
the groundless “defense” of
their rights.
By putting on a white hat
and trying to convince everyone
that they are defending them
selves, hate writers can get
away with advocating terrible
things in the name of defense.
Especially given America’s
less-than-exemplary treatment
of such groups as Germans, Ni
sei and Native Americans, it is
not surprising that this strategy
works.
The price of freedom is eter
nal vigilance — vigilance need
ed to guard against the hatred
of people who do not want to
learn the truth.
Chris Huffines is a senior
speech communication major.