Image provided by: Texas A&M University
About The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 14, 2001)
THE BATTALION Page 11 ED CROSSing the line donated majority of money to Sept. 11 victims donor intent” with how the money has been man- Healy and other Red Cross leaders said. Ilk- lei, zd Cross should have the wake of the Sept. 1 1 terrorist attacks, illions of Americans showed the true good- of their nature by donating more than $1 n to various charitable organizations. Sadly, it now seems that more than a few of those charities were as interested in helping themselves to this treasure trove as they were helping the families of the victims. These are not small groups, either: one of the chari ties that has been called out on the carpet is none other than the American Red Cross. In its handling of the fcerty Fund,” the Red ass has disillusioned i(j infuriated many iericans who feel that r money is not being ■d in the way it was |tjnded. s of last week, the “Liberty d” had taken in more than B4 million in donations. These ■ations were made by Americans Being to ensure that the families of ■victims were taken care of now and in ■ future. Two months after the attacks, the tel Cross has dispersed $121 million of that Hie Wife Cota !o|tey to the victims and oniy another $ l 79 md ayhawks Wednesi n its handling of the Liberty Fund, he Red Cross has disillusioned and ifuriated many Americans who feel at their money is not being used in the way it was intended. i pro after time, fie follow. According to ames and waii.Bernadine Healy, the out rum a battle president of the job «# Mmvericm Red Cross, remaining $264 iom—nearly 47 bnt of this wind- of generosity—will be :en up by the Red Cross lelf. Bill O'Reilly, host of Fox News’ he O’Reilly Factor,” has gone so far to claim that 80 percent of this frtiBnev will not reach the families for nich it was intended. donor intent” with how the money has been man aged. Somehow, the Red Cross has decided that “donor intent” means Liberty Fund money can go toward anthrax victims, a $50 — million program to build blood inventories and a donation of $14.7 million for community outreach. The remaining $200 million, in the meantime, will remain in the bank, collecting interest for the Red Cross. VA • THE BATTAU ludicrous." hr ated Press, greatest p college ‘ way.” nghorns d son Nov. 23 a® VI. With i * ggies, Texas« bid to a hip Series^ said he has coach Mackh ro possibility really the m? 1 think." Simnis j /e’ll have ei about it.’ A Red Cross spokesman has said repeatedly the organization “feels it has been true to CHAD MALLAM • THE BATTALION Healy and other Red Cross leaders said, according to The Washington Post, “Their mes sages to local chapters and their public appeals made clear to donors that money would be used for family needs after the Sept. 11 attacks, and for its ‘aftermath’ and ‘emerging’ needs.’ ” Most people would have considered that to mean the “aftermath” and “emerging needs” of the wid ows, widowers and orphans of Sept. 11, not the Red Cross. They certainly would not have approved of the Red Cross hoard ing money toward a fund they claim is for victims of a second attack that may never come. It is disappointing to see that the Red Cross is looking at such a humanitarian disaster as a big payday, but it would not be the first time that they have shown a lack of appreciation for people who raised money on their | behalf. This summer, Texas A&M students set up the Chad Garren Memorial Flood Relief Fund that was intended to help raise money for the victims of Tropical Storm Allison. The storm, which ravaged Houston in June, killed 17 people, including a member of the A&M Class of 2001. Instead of helping the novice students with their efforts, the Red Cross refused to return phone calls, would not guarantee that the money raised would go to the victims of Tropical Storm Allison, declined to help with public relations efforts — in spite of having a paid staff on hand to do so — and refused to assist the students in obtaining not-for-profit sta tus from the IRS. Red Cross officials were, how ever, able to attend the Aug. 16 event to ask when they would be receiving their check. The Red Cross has done many great things for people in need for more than 100 years. Their actions of this summer, and more importantly now, might cause one to wonder if they have decided that their good deeds now , extend to | themselves. If 1 true, this would be a tragic disaster in its own right. For the sake of many people, let us all hope that the Red Cross places the needs of others before the needs of itself. Mark Passwaters is a senior political science major. all game on campus EDITORIAL Texas A&M University— Celebrating 125 Years EDITORIAL BOARD Brady Creel Mariano Castillo Cayla Carr Jonathan Jones Rolando Garcia Editor in Chief Managing Editor Opinion Editor Opinion Editor News Editor Never Underestimate the Uncartoon Texas A&IVTs perfect political cartoon would be one by which no one is disturbed, no thought is provoked and no humor is found — a true Uncartoon. CARTOON OF THE DAY 'TVi€ DNc* Rt6C>N/Wf-<!D Honorary mascots In response to Brieanne Porter’s Nov. 13 column: Although there may be people who are offended by the use of Native American names for their high school mascots, it should be taken as an honor rather than a slander. There are many mascot names out there that represent a group of people: Dallas Cowboys, University of Louisiana Ragin Cajun’s and the New York Yankees. I am a graduate of Port Neches- Groves (PN-G) High School that has the mascot “Indians." PN-G is a high school that is very dedicat ed to tradition, just like Texas A&M. In the early 1970’s, the Cherokee Nation gave a seal of approval to the PN-G Independent School District for use of “Indian” for its mascot. Would they have given the seal of approval if it was so offensive? I believe that my high school honors Native Americans by sustaining pride and the tradition of excel lence within the school district. Coming from a high school so conservative in tradition, I find it very hard to believe PN-G would ever give up its mascot name. It is the equivalent of someone forc ing Texas A&M to change its mascot. We all know that would never happen. Ever since I have been here at A&M, I have learned that there are a lot of people who don’t feel strong about their high school traditions. It might be easy for a person like that to agree to change their high school mascot. But when you are very dedicated to tradition, like so many Aggies here at A&M, you will put up a fight and never give up. I believe my high school will never give up its mascot name for as long as it exists. Brandon Hanks Class of 2000 A sign of maturity In response to Richard Bray's Nov. 12 column: The recent opinion from the RHA concerning the wording of the fight song is a welcome sign of maturity. After almost 40 years on the campus, I am con vinced that constantly looking over our shoulder at Austin seri ously inhibits our ability to look ahead to our own future. The sec ond verse two should be reserved for games where the university in Austin is our opponent. Today’s letter from Mr. Williamson also flies in the face of history. Unless he is from the Class of 1902 he will graduate from a university not a college. Believe me, he should be grate ful! David G. Woodcock professor of architecture GEORGE DEUTSCH Rent-a-Center falsely accused B ig business forever has been an easy target for people looking to scam those more fortunate than themselves with needless law suits. In today’s increasingly political ly correct workplace, this trend only is getting worse. In most of these cases, the facts are rendered irrelevant because this country’s judicial system feels continually obligated to rule in favor of the struggling “little man.” Plano, Texas-based Rent-A-Center, the nation’s largest rent-to-own chain, has fallen prey to many such frivolous lawsuits, the most recent of which resulted in a $12.3 million out-of-court settlement with 4,600 female employees. Interestingly enough, only nineteen of these female employ ees actually fded the suit. The other 4,581 apparently joined in when they saw that there was money to be made. Rent-A-Center has denied any wrong doing. Because the company has either settled or lost questionable lawsuits in the past, ranging from racial discrimi nation to unfair hiring practices, these ladies clearly thought that they could cash in with a sex-discrimination suit. They were right. The $12.3 million settlement that was reached could have been even worse had the case gone to trial. No jury wants to rule against 4,600 “helpless” women, regardless of the evidence presented. But it was these women’s own physical and mental limitations, not company policy or poor management, that held them back and interfered with their performance at work. The And a good look at these ladies' comical list of griev ances shows that this law suit is just that — a ripoff. rent-to-own giant should not have been forced to cough up a dime. Admittedly, rent-to-own companies do have their problems. They are not traditionally known for their leniency or generosity. But they generally stick to overcharging their customers; cus tomers who know exactly what they are getting into when they walk through the front door. But perhaps Rent-A-Center taught a few of its female employees a little too well because the students have started ripping off their teacher. And a good look at these ladies’ comical list of grievances shows that this lawsuit is just that — a ripoff. Some of these women claim that they were discouraged from applying or simply not hired by Rent-A- Center. Half of the company’s work force is composed of women, many of whom are happily employed. The management did not put “we don’t hire women” on job applications. People are quick to cry “discrimina tion” when they are not hired instead of considering the fact that they may not have been qualified for the job they were seeking. These ladies also claim that Rent- A-Center’s weight-lifting requirements for employees were simply “too heavy.” But if someone cannot meet the demands of the job description, it should come as no surprise to them when they lose that job, regardless of their sex. If a female employee cannot lift a television or appliance, she obvi ously has no business working at Rent-A-Center. After all, it is not like she was asked to juggle this stuff. All of the company’s employees were given adequate tools and training to meet their job’s demands. Rent-A-Center was even willing to allow most of these limp-armed ladies to continue working, taking less physi cally taxing jobs such as cleaning or doing clerical work. Though this may have been all some of these women were qualified for, it came as a slap in the face because they considered themselves above sweeping or typing. It was only out of sheer fear of harsher monetary penalties that Rent- A-Center settled with these women. With a poor track record that would have meant certain doom in court, the company had its back against the wall. It is unfortunate that senseless lawsuits like this ever get off the ground. George Deutsch is a junior journalism major.