Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Oct. 15, 1999)
id No, 6^ off ttieif in will be The woitf against ps lie women’ earns rai 'op 25 PH Battalion PINION Page 9 • Friday, October 15, 1999 No. 4% Had* iid of le drives, he shoots, he scores! wadley’s surging campaign could overtake Gore, make strong bid for party nomination Sarly in the cam- i , i overhaul of the campaign-finance sys- His proposals include an easier jy,"" --— arly iSiM jup 7 B paign race, there ancedto{(j Lwas little opposi- Ull-Amepj |to Al Gore’s sta- ips Thuis^ $‘S the leading (i Tennis™'" y of Te»i who is ? s the tw ed. He 5tahlbei§ Mississ ming row will not Doug Poj: 3 plait the sec: ay ors and )S. imers. Ceil i factor Mate for the De- ratic Party's 2000 idential nomina- | Thankfully, De- ratic voters have ly woken from their stupor and re- d Gore is not the man to lead the [itry into the next millennium, is lack of charisma has already alien- him from a sizable portion of the brate. Gore’s blunders as vice-presi- Jhave put him in the historical neigh- iood of Dan Quayle. [rom claiming full credit in the inven- ofthe Internet to advocating a feder- iw banning gang colors in schools, has managed to put off a large num- fhis fellow party members, dnsequently, this sizable portion of emocratic Party is throwing its sup- toward Bill Bradley, the former three- his pr; 'dima, £! ntheir sissippii Stahibeil id of lable atsenator from New Jersey and bas- Americs - : all hall of fa men Deemed a long shot Mai gfc 1 :! le beginning of his campaign, Bradley 5. Incluc- become a serious contender for the Cc,cs lination. As of last week, Bradley was ing Gore by double digits in the polls ay primary states such as New York, mentco'tt has Bradley enjoyed this recent |Hess? Other than being the only alter- veto Gore within the Democratic Par- Iradley has prioritized the campaign es that will gain him instant favor in court of public opinion. From re- Ming to the tragic shootings in Little- Colo., to the public outcry for an termite:.:! opearstiie mg should has ash cai| art wifi uiers jntige program i A&M rence ska, year t move >re they itart lool rhouse rnhusln overhaul of the campaign-finance sys tem, Bradley is telling the public what they want to hear, while Gore is busy de bating the merits of obscure and frivo lous legislation with George W. Bush. If Gore wishes to make it past the pri maries, he must follow Bradley’s example. From the straightforwardness of his platform to the handling of discrepancies in his past, Bradley has run the ideal cam paign. Rather than letting spin doctors and policy planners dictate his moves, Bradley has run the show from the begin ning, making him a much more credible, believable candidate. One such example comes from Bradley’s admission of marijuana use during his youth. When addressing questions concerning his drug use, Bradley has stuck to his guns, giving di rect and consistent answers. Needless to say, his marijuana use is now a mere footnote in his campaign. Unlike Gov. Bush’s flip-flop approach to his alleged cocaine use, Bradley nipped the issue in the bud early on. He admit ted the indiscretion in his recent biogra phy Time Present, Time Past. Bradley also has been the only candi date to draw up a comprehensive alterna tive to the existing campaign-finance sys tem. Other than Republican presidential candidate Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., Bradley is the only candidate proposing a facelift of the system. He has gone so far as to challenge his fellow presidential candidates to refuse “soft money” contri butions, large donations made to the par ty and then filtered to candidates in order to exceed limits on contributing to indi vidual campaigns. His proposals include an easier process for voter registration and free po litical broadcasts on television before elections. His hope is that general federal elections will eventually be funded en tirely by the U.S. government. On the issue of gun control, Bradley’s platform is a reflection of the public’s re cent outcry against the gun lobby. In his interview in Rolling Stone magazine, Bradley promised to push forward “the toughest position ever taken by a presi dential candidate” toward gun control. This platform includes mandatory registration of all handguns, required comprehensive safety courses and the elimination of gun dealerships in resi dential districts. “We are at a time where there’s a growing body of public opinion that will make common-sense gun control a possi bility,” Bradley said. The problem with this approach is that Bradley might be promising the pub lic too much. Although his intentions are good, the actual implementation of his proposals are unlikely. Understandably, political pundits have blasted Bradley’s approach for its “wish list” nature. However, the fact remains that Bradley is a welcome alternative to the other presidential candidates. His common-sense campaign strategy has made him a viable candidate for the Democratic nomination. Unless the opposition takes note of this, Bradley may be on the fast track to the White House. David Lee is a junior economics major. JEFF SMITH/The Battalion MfeUlcKcMdl ,, EMC# (fr&rmniwf GOP should not balance federal budget on backs of worldng poor said W smelte ed to‘ at thti D dkab« n, a cii® Military coup in Pakistan raises ears of nuclear confrontation ack w )1! 14J MARK PASSWATERS :ker ;well 75238 A. ihe Pak istani military autlwBaged a coup hurl $!j gainst its na- on’s democra- cally elected overnment iiesday, claim- | ing Prime Min- ter Nawaz harif had destabilized the coun- nWeiftOffy.- While not the first coup in "" akistan’s history, this overthrow ,r P s '^i aould worry both Pakistanis and imericans. The reason Americans should ie concerned has little to do with g lie Jeffersonian concept of ™ preading and preserving democ- acies throughout the world. It las to do with the fact that Pak- stan is a nation with powerful veapons, and there is now no ne who can prevent the military irom using them. Pakistan and its archenemy, ndia, are both nuclear powers. — -This summer, a protracted bor- ztfo W ler conflict over the disputed re gion of Kashmir nearly escalated nto a nuclear conflict between hem. The military takeover ould push them dangerously close to that brink again. Sharif, under pressure from ihe United States, assisted in eas ing tensions between the two na tions. By September, things had calmed to the point that Sharif Was able to visit New Delhi in an ""lattempt to reach a lasting peace agreement with India. Sharif took these actions 99' K0C Ml against the wishes of the mili tary, which has always held great power in Pakistan. Kashmir has been the cause of two major wars between India and Pakistan in the last 52 years, and the Pak istani military still wants to in corporate the mostly Muslim In dian province into Pakistan. This summer supposed “rebels” took up positions on the Pakistani side of the Kashmiri border, fighting with Indian forces. These forces were at the very least supplied by the Pak istani military and were most likely disguised Pakistani sol diers. As the skirmishes in creased in ferocity, India and Pakistan both threatened the oth er with full-scale war and nu clear annihilation if fighting did not stop. Sharif took the threats seriously and tensions subsided, a development that did not sit well with those supposedly un der his authority. The situation in Kashmir caused the relationship between Sharif and Pakastani Army Chief of Staff Gen. Pervez Musharraf to sour even further, as Mushar raf and other military leaders saw it as a loss of face. Sharif fired Musharraf Tues day. The military responded by arresting Sharif and taking over the government. Musharraf claims Sharif was attempting to make himself a dictator and that the prime min ister’s actions had caused the na tion to become unstable. Whether this is true is not really an issue to people outside of Pak istan. What is of far greater con cern to the world is quite obvi ous: Are the members of this coup intent on fighting over Kashmir again? If the answer is yes, the coup could be a disaster for not only Pakistan and India but the whole world. Despite the fact that Pak istan has a population of 139 million and 500,000 armed men, it could not possibly win a war against India. The unwillingness to let the Kashmir issue go, cou pled with this almost certain outcome, could easily lead to nuclear confrontation. While the U.S. State Depart ment says it is opposed to coups and democracy must prevail in Pakistan, it should be worried about something far more basic. Never before in human history have two nuclear nations with so much hatred toward each other had an issue that could lead con frontation at any time. The threat of nuclear ar- mageddon makes a slightly big ger impression on the human psyche than the potential loss of democracy. The United States should be doing everything in its power to make sure these new Pakistani leaders will continue Sharif’s course on this issue, if nothing else. Otherwise, the overthrow in Pakistan could be an overthrow of global peace. Mark Pass waters is a electrical engineering graduate student. T he Republi can Party is at it again. In the ’80s, Reagan’s “Voodoo Eco nomics” gave a big tax cut to the rich and powerful. The money the wealthy saved on taxes was supposed to “trickle down” to the common man and create opportunities for the work ing poor. But the common folk are still waiting. And it looks like they may have to wait longer still. The GOP has come up with a smoke-and-mir- rors gimmick to make everything work out so they can ride off as heroes into the sunset on their trusty horses. But they are not con sidering the condition of their mounts. The horses that are supposed to carry the heroes into the sunset are the working poor. When House Republicans needed a loan recently to bal ance their budget plan, they took the money from a tax benefit called the earned in come credit, which has given tax breaks to poor families for the past 25 years. Republicans did not want to touch the Social Security surplus. They did not want to raise taxes for their rich buddies. They did not want to cut any of the pork-barrel programs that keep them living the high life inside the Beltway. So when they needed money, the most logical place to get it was from poor people. The idea of asking people to give what they do not have is in- Chechen terrorists provoked conflict In response to Elizabeth Kohl’s Oct. 12 column. Kohl should be more informed and careful in offering her one-sided opinion on political situations in for eign countries. The murders of innocent civil ians were not started by Russia. Chechnya is by no means the inno cent “scapegoat” or cuddly teddy bear Kohl portrays it to be. Over furiating. But from a politician’s perspective, it makes perfect sense to rob someone powerless to stop the crime. People who are poor do not generally participate in political life. When earning a living is a daily struggle, almost everything beyond the barest necessities must go. Each expenditure of en ergy must be paid in cash. Many poor people regard the endless forms, red tape and ap pointments necessary to collect public assistance a full-time job. MARK McPHERSON/Tm: Battalion While the political parties hold conventions and primaries, the working poor will be working. It is likely they will be working on Election Day, too. And this means the politicians who have robbed them will not have to an swer for their crime. MAIL CALL 300 people were maliciously killed in their own homes as a result of Chechen terrorists’ apartment bombings. The unprovoked terrorist attack caused Russia’s military reaction as a final means to stop the slaughter of its citizens. Please remember that there are always two sides to every conflict. If you venture to offer your opinion on one, at least make sure you are sufficiently informed on both. Maria Morgan Graduate Student There has been a theory circu lating for years that all forms of social welfare and public assis tance are actually crowd control of the poor. When times are tough, aid for the indigent expands. When the economy begins to grow and create jobs, welfare contracts, forcing people into the job force. The GOP apparently used this logic — which suggests the poor do not need to be helped directly during economic booms — to jus tify its elimination of the earned income tax. Needy citizens who formerly received a lump sum of money from the government, handy for paying debts or buying food, they will get their money in true Republi can fashion — the trick le-down way. The re sult amounts to an interest-free loan for the government. Maybe it is not JH fair to blame it all on Republicans. No one party controls the entire country. Consid ering Washington’s track record, one wonders if any one is in control at all. Here is a refreshing idea. Republicans: When balanc ing the budget, give the poor a break. If that means cutting fat from the budget somewhere else, so be it. Less is more, especially when it comes to the government. An acceptable alternative for the poor has always been, “If you cannot afford it, do without.” Perhaps the government should use the same frugal rule of thumb when balancing its own ballooning budget. Ann Weaver Hart is a senior English major. 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: battietters@hotmail.com