Opinion
The Battalion
Page 11 • Monday, November 18, 2002
otal Republican control scary
Many worried about Republicans dominating White House,
BRIEANNE PORTER
al and bic ;
wn as ‘dm
de w ^apof(j
these wean
50 Sfnal,te
a protect?, Tn a historical feat
gear Bduring this year’s
^nid-term elec-
|b, the President’s
y gained House
s and control of
the Senate. While
py people would prefer to have an
ivided Capitol to reduce gridlock
add accomplish goals. Republican
Itrol of the House, Senate and the
lite House is worrisome for many,
lial programs and civil liberties will
nabsortmos- teat stake with Republican control,
store they* |Fifty-one percent of Americans say
[ire will get done in Washington,
fty-two percent are at least some-
at concerned, and 28 percent are
concerned that the GOP will
ve the country in too conservative a
;tion, according to a Newsweek
for
some
Senate and House
but art loo
sty weapo-i
ic to traj
ht pens
2. bin
yuld pas
>al layer
med toe
Icame.Af
Republican control spells trouble
for issues such as abortion rights,
gvironmental protection and social
|curity reforms along with powers for
Homeland Security Office. “By
inning control of the Senate and
panding their House majority, con-
ssional Republicans are positioned
(push their agenda of new tax cuts,
Aarket-based health care reforms and
ni eo frr ppointments of anti-abortion, conser-
allowedl'i five judges,” said the f/ze
Missour hhington Post. Some of the first
s up info' kings the new Senate will address in
m. “Astliea Ifnuary are presidential nominations
■ballanJ for federal judges. When Democrats
kad control of the Senate and
ics wed ; Iproved nominations, many found
Aggie a;: £ii problems with the nominees. These
as four problems included conservative
'Stances on abortion and privacy issues.
For these reasons, President Bush was
not able to place the judges he wanted
on the bench. “The president’s judicial
, nominees, stalled by Senate
I Democrats who controlled the com-
t|ittees that could block their consid
eration, are expected to move quickly
ft) approval by a Senate soon to be
4'itrolled by Republicans,” said The
wantu Journal-Constitution. While
| a ny people do not see the problem
Combiu
through
ck Brad
; game.-.-
e victor
with the President’s judicial
nominations, people who
guard their privacy and
individual rights are trying
to find a way to prevent this
conservative take over of
federal judges. Federal
judges are appointed to life terms and
are often the source of Supreme Court
nominees. With federal judges in posi
tion to make crucial decisions about
government powers and controversial
issues, many Democrats and liberals
are wondering if they will lose many
rights, including that of abortion.
Another issue expected to come
before Congress is the opening of the
Arctic National Wildlife Refuge
(ANWR) to oil drilling.
Environmentalists across the
United States are fearing the
destruction of a national treasure
for the goal of gaining more oil
and decreasing America’s depend
ence on foreign oil, mainly Middle
Eastern. In a Telegraph (London)
article. Senate energy committee
member and Republican Dan
Woodruff, said “Opening ANWR
was a top priority for President
Bush and obviously you’ll have
a leadership much more inter
ested in pursuing that.” While it
is an admirable goal to decrease
America’s dependency on Middle
Eastern oil, especially with
increasing tensions with Iraq, pro
tection of the Wildlife Refuge that
is home to the arctic fox, caribou
and snowy owl must come first. The
environment is fragile and any oil
exploration could destroy it. With
Republican control of the House and
now the Senate, Americans can expect
to see ecological concerns pushed to
the wayside in the name of money and
independence.
Also on the Bush agenda are wel
fare reforms and tax cuts. Tax cuts are
usually a welcomed addition, though
that is not the case when the federal
government is now facing
a deficit. The government
does not need to create tax cuts, but
instead curb government spending
until the deficit is under control.
“President Bush vowed to combat ris
ing budget deficits through a combina
tion of spending curbs and tax breaks
to stimulate growth, putting govern
ment departments on notice for poten
tially painful belt-tighten
-ing next year,” according to Reuters
news service. Yet, President Bush’s
economic plan seems very similar to
Reagan-era tax cuts, where it was sup
ply side economics to stimulate
growth. Reagan’s plan did not work
and the United States went further into
recession. America does not need the
same type of economic plan. It needs
something to bring the bull back to the
market and this plan does not incur
hope into the hearts
of many.
Republican
control of the
federal gov- *
ernment is worri
some and
downright scary. Anyone who is a
lover of freedom and the envi-
ronment, be forewarned the
M next two years are going to be
A an uphill battle. Liberals and
Democrats everywhere need to
remain watchful of the gov
ernment now that they are
in a distinct minority.
Brienne Porter is a
senior political
science major.
JEFF SMITH • THE BATTALION
GEORGE DEUTSCH
I n a report
issued last
month,
U S. Public
Interest
Research
Groups (U.S.
PIRG) declared cigarette smoking too
adult for PG-13 movies, asking the
Motion Picture Association of America to
now give films depicting smoking an R
rating. The group says smoking in PG-13
movies equates to tobacco companies
advertising to children, a violation of a
•998 multi -state tobacco settlement.
U.S. PIRG’s study, however, relies
heavily on faulty logic, as cigarette use
does not necessarily constitute product
advertisement and not all PG-13 films are
inherently aimed at children. The argu
ment fails to adequately link smoking in
motion pictures with increased tobacco
u se in young people or consider smoking
shown on television.
For a group clearly biased against
tobacco companies to say a child is likely
j° commit an act, in this case smoking,
just because he witnesses it in a movie is
''logical and only exposes the group’s
a genda. PG-13 films often feature vio
lence, sex and vulgar language, but the
[sport failed to address these issues,
mstead claiming that smoking would be
the only thing children pick up.
When someone leaves a movie theater,
they alone decide whether they will
s moke, shoot someone or behave inappro
priately. People don’t just blindly mimic
everything they see and hear in films with
absolutely no control over their own
actions, whether they are children or not.
PG-13 films are also not exclusively
marketed toward children. Such an
assumption is insane. If any rating could
he said to be for children it would be G,
hut even that rating doesn’t exclude any
other age group. This year’s popular horror
movie The Ring, which was marketed
toward adults, was rated PG-13, and there
Was considerably more to get upset about
than tobacco use. So, as box office success
Indicates, PG-13 movies are marketed
toward adult audiences, not just children.
U.S. PIRG’s report attacks films such
as the Will Smith failure. Wild Wild West,
which the group says featured an inappro
priate four minutes of tobacco use. Forget
the fact that the film is, as the title might
suggest, about the American West and his
torical accuracy might dictate the use of
tobacco. If U.S. PIRG had its way, charac
ters in films like this would be able to
carry guns and shoot others under a PG-13
rating, but not smoke cigarettes. If this
sounds unreasonable, even stupid, it
should.
The report, found online at uspirg.org,
lists many useless facts such as this but
fails to list any that actually tie smoking
in PG-13 films with an increase in youth
smoking. That is because no such statis
tics exist, and in fact, any link between
movie smoking and underage smoking
would be questionable at best.
U.S. PIRG boldly asserts motion pic
ture producers and big tobacco companies
are in some way colluding to get the
young to smoke, but fails to produce any
evidence supporting its claim.
Unfortunately, this is the type of hasty
action and ill-supported claims people
have come to expect from watchdog
organizations such as this.
People can still be seen smoking on
cable and network television, but U.S.
PIRG’s report makes no mention of
effects TV smoking might have on chil
dren. Children cannot be immune to tele
vision smoking but susceptible to movie
smoking, or vice versa. U.S. PIRG can
not simply blame movie makers for youth
smoking and fail to make a similar case
against television, as such an argument is
weak and ill-structured.
The fact remains that if people wants to
smoke, they will, regardless of their age or
the ratings of the movies they watch.
Needless indictments of the tobacco and
entertainment industries will not signifi
cantly alter youth smoking patterns.
People’s decisions are their own to make,
and new and unnecessary regulation will
not change that.
moking not R-rated Bonfire: three years later
George Deutsch is a senior
journalism major.
MARIANO CASTILLO
I t is 2:42 a.m. right
now. I am out at the
Polo Fields, and l
am shivering. I’m not
sure if it’s because of
the temperature, or
because suddenly I’ve
gone back in time three years to this moment. On
Nov. 18, 1999, Aggie Bonfire collapsed on this
very spot, killing 12 Aggies, injuring 27, and
wounding the hearts of hundreds of thousands.
To those of us who worked at cut and stack, and
anyone who saw the imposing Bonfire construc
tion, the collapse was unimaginable. For me, it was
incomprehensible that it would fall like that — so
quickly and so deadly.
The hard work, sounds and sweat that would
normally take place here during Bonfire push has
been replaced by a reverent silence. I can faintly
hear the bell at Albritton Tower, and
its stately “dong.”
My class was the last to build
and burn a Bonfire as students, and
the Class of 2003 the last to work
on one. Underclassmen at A&M
would benefit themselves and
future classes by learning about
Aggie Bonfire traditions, because
their collective actions and deci
sions will write the next page in the
tradition’s history. All Aggies
should take a moment on this third
observance of the tragedy and examine Bonfire in a
historical perspective.
In the past three years, some students have taken
up a mission to rebuild the tradition through vari
ous means, while others have pressed to let it go.
The Bonfire Coalition for Students has become a
recognized organization and seeks to work through
the system; the Unity Project has successfully
organized an off-campus stack that stays true to
many bonfire traditions; others say better to do
away with the tradition than for a modified version,
and so forth.
What will future generations of Aggies say of
the decisions we are making today regarding the
tradition of Aggie Bonfire? The actions of current
students will speak volumes about our values to
future generations. This is what our Aggie pride is
built on — the legacy that past Aggie leaders, when
faced with tremendous decisions, made the right
choice when it counted.
Lawrence Sullivan Ross did the right thing by
fighting to keep A&M open. E. King Gill did the
right thing by suiting up to play. Gen. James Earl
Rudder did the right thing by transforming the
A&M College into the A&M University. There are
u
Students must
accept the debate
over Bonfire
seriously and believe
firmly in their
stance.
meaningful messages behind these acts that define
what being an Aggie is. This Aggie Lore is one of
the strongest facets of the Aggie Spirit, and a rea
son why so many of us chose to get an education
here.
For us today looking back, these decisions set
examples of the type of leaders we wish to become.
In this sense, the historical perspective of Bonfire
is as important as ever.
There is a real powerful message in several sto
ries surrounding the history of Bonfire. Among the
most notable is that Aggie Bonfire did not burn in
1963 because of President John F. Kennedy’s assas
sination. Bonfire, a symbol so strong and a tradi
tion so proud to so many students at A&M, was
undone — taken apart log by log — because it was
the noble thing to do. That story should send shiv
ers down your spine. Only Aggies would have the
strength and conviction to put aside their most
revered tradition for such a tragedy.
A student 50 years from now
would read about the 1999 Aggie
Bonfire collapse and how it did not
burn on campus for three years,
among a student body divided. What
happens next?
Students must accept the debate
over the future of Bonfire seriously
and believe firmly in their stance.
There are valid points to positions to
bring back Bonfire and to put it on
the shelf. To put aside our treasured
Bonfire forever because of the loss of the 12 would
be a world-class statement on how Aggies place
their own over a material tradition. Equally com
pelling is the message of perseverance and love of
traditions that would be displayed if students suc
cessfully bring back Bonfire.
So much has happened in the last 1,095 days. I
open my eyes as Albritton chimes for the 12th
time, and memories rush through my veins. With
my thumb and index finger I pinch the top of my
nose, right between the eyes.
Nov. 18, 1999 was one of the darkest days A&M
has seen. How we pick ourselves up and drive on
will be the next chapter of Aggie Lore.
I don’t have the answer to what the right future
for Bonfire is. But remembering the lives of
Miranda Adams, Christopher Breen, Michael
Ebanks, Jeremy Frampton, Jamie Hand,
Christopher Heard, Tim Kerlee, Lucas Kimmel,
Bryan McClain, Chad Powell, Jerry Self and Scott
West is the right thing to do today.
Here.
Mariano Castillo is a senior
international studies and journalism major.