The Battalion. (College Station, Tex.) 1893-current, January 16, 2003, Image 13

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    NATIOl
HE BATTALH
urth
.ossei
ir loss
ntinental
ay travelers helpe:
tinental Airlines
1er loss. The
Iso beat Wall Stree
n millions
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 5B • Thursday, January 16, 2003
49
>001 Q4 2002
>er share
TBf
Analysts expectec
04 2002
xxnpany I
agreement bents
rier and t
al Brotherhood
by a 73 perc;
officials said t
includes compe;
and benefits wfei!
g Continenu of
ictivity advantage
olace.
Court
ding
such movies
:a.” "The Wizard
"Gone With
N;
Women can yeii too
Aggie 5 should overcome their fears and elect a female yell leader
o one expects elected offi
cials to perfectly reflect
the makeup of their con
stituency. But sometimes the
homogeneity found at certain
positions is ridiculous. For exam
ple, despite the fact that Texas
A&M has a sizable female popu
lation, there has yet to be a
female yell leader. Therefore, if a
female Aggie who possesses the popular
ity, the determination and — most impor
tantly — enough Aggie spirit to become
an A&M yell leader, she should not hesi
tate to run for the the position.
Unfortunately, the prospect of female
yell leaders has proven controversial in
the past. For example, in 1972, Student
Senate leaders protested a resolution that
would delete the word "female" from the
necessary yell leader qualifications.
Committee chairman Fred Campbell told
The Eagle that the change
was initiated “to keep
with the changing makeup
the campus." But
Campbell was quick to
point out that most mem
bers of his committee
were not "gung-ho for the
idea of having a girl yell
leader.” The controversy
continued in 1975 when
Rajesh Kent, a representa
tive of Law, Puryear and
Cain halls was denounced
at a Puryear Hall Council
u
Nominating one of
their outstanding fe
male cadets as one of
their “Corps Bloc” of
candidates would
send a strong message
to the A&M commu
nity that anyone...
should have the con-
ent giants lil meeting because he had
I AOL Time Ware voted for the resolution
lime Warner f that would allow women
ould threaten cop to run for yell leader,
according to The Battalion.
In a Battalion article earlier that year,
writer Robert Cessna asked, “When will
wehave women yell leaders? Or will they
nS r ° always be out of place?" Cessna asked
r or Jr ^ the then current yell leaders and their
•a, consensus was female yell leaders
irhest films, such ,. , , r_ ^
pamhoat Willie" WOuld 0n, y make us a carbon co Py of
u 3ther schools.” This is a ridiculous state-
ng will affect mo' , ..... ,, . ,
^ i nent. Whether filled by a male or female,
d heirs of auW hij - ,
~ t, .i, :he A&M yell leader is a one-of-a-kind
OSClS. 11 Will fill . ^ LL 1 ¥ •
II music publishe: tra dition and never a carbon copy. It is
and church die! disappointing that some of A&M's previ-
lay royalties to pi Dus y eb leaders allowed their prejudices
pj eces :o blind them to the strength and mar-
inners are folks\'|
ble copyrights. I
everyone else." st
affe, a Washing!:
Tio filed argumf
court challeni
; is going to p
things they wot
or free.”
velous nature of their own posi
tion. In the Cessna article, one of
the yell leaders, Jim Mickler said
of a female yell leader, "I can’t
see a girl doing some things . . .
There would be a lot of prob
lems.” Hank Paine, head yell
leader for the 1972-’73 academic
year, agreed, telling The Eagle he
feared “ . . .females would not be
able to meet some of the more physically
demanding requirements.” These fears
are silly. Granted, anyone who runs for
yell leader must have the mental fortitude
to withstand the scrutiny associated with
the position. But the notion that only
males can handle the physical require
ments is laughable.
For instance, some proponents of a
male-only yell leader policy may argue
that men’s voices are naturally deeper
and louder than women’s, therefore mak
ing them more suitable
for the position of “yell”
leader. But despite their
title, yell leaders yell
quite infrequently and
often use a microphone
when addressing a
crowd. Male-only sup
porters might point out
that male yell leaders
are better equipped to
race up and down the
sidelines during football
games. But this argu
ment ignores the fact
that standing up during
an entire football game
is a strenuous activity,
and thousands of female
Ags do so every game day. Male-only
proponents may also argue that female
yell leaders might feel uncomfortable
being handled by mostly male Corps
freshmen when the yell leaders are
chased, caught and dunked in Fish Pond
after an Aggie victory. But any female
running for yell leader would know that
this activity is part of the position’s duties
and would do anything possible to keep
A&M tradition alive.
Many Aggies fear female yell leaders
will automatically lead to cheerleaders.
But this fear is irrational. And it’s misog-
ynistic to think that a female yell leader
sideration of student
voters.
will automatically want
to remake the yell
leader tradition into
a cheerleading
position. In fact,
one woman who ran
for yell leader in 1981,
Sarah Findlay, told The
Battalion, “I despise cheer
leaders. It is an exploitation
of women.”
The Corps of Cadets can
play a large role in easing the
way for a female yell leader.
Nominating one of their out
standing female cadets as one
of their “Corps Bloc” candidates
would send a strong message to
the A&M community that anyone,
male or female, qualified for yell
leader should have the consideration
of student voters. Aggies will also
have an easier time supporting women
yell leaders knowing the "Keepers of the
Spirit” support them also.
There is evidence that the Corps
would be receptive to having a female
yell leader. A Battalion photo that ran in
the Friday, March 23, 1979 edition
depicts a female leading a crowd in Aggie
yells. The caption reads: “The position of
yell leader at Texas A&M took a new
shape Thursday night. Freshman Kim
Manuel, an Army ROTC cadet in the W-l
unit was the first woman ever to be a
Texas A&M yell leader. She was one of
five freshmen “yell leaders” at
Thursday’s Elephant Bowl Game.”
Granted, Manuel wasn’t a “real” elected
yell leader and she only led one off-sea
son March game. But this proves there is
a successful precedent in having a female
yell leader.
Indeed, electing a woman as a yell
leader would be the perfect mix of “Old
Army" tradition and A&M’s status as a
large, cosmopolitan University.
Collins Ezeanyim is a senior
computer engineering major.
Leigh Richardson • THE BATTALION
ights encourage
nd preservation
he exclusive
os for a “limits
Gates' stance was
mischaracterized
For the record, I am com
pelled to correct several
errors and misimpressions in
k Valenti, presidt qfig two articles that ran on
>f the Motion Picli ^ Jan. 15, based on an inter-
n of America, si jview between myself and a
representative of University
Relations.
With respect to the article
onstitution allo| on improving the faculty, I did
to give authors i not say — and have never
said — that we need to
improve the "quality" of our
faculty. The faculty we have
are terrific. What I did say in
the interview — and many
times elsewhere — is that we
need to increase the number
of the faculty, their pay and
the number of endowed
chairs and professorships.
With respect to the article
on Senator Ogden, diversity
and me, I did not say that the
new vice president for institu
tional diversity would have lit
tle authority and would have
only an advisory role. I said
that the position would have
a very small staff, much like
the vice presidents for gov
ernment relations and
Development (both of whom
have authority), and that I
wanted the person in the
position to be a facilitator and
a positive influence on the
campus — not a divisive per
son.
Your headline suggests that
The Battalion is trying to pick
a fight between Sen. Ogden
and myself on diversity. Yet,
you quote him as saying that
diversity is "about making
A&M a more welcoming
place, not filling quotas." That
is exactly my position, and
Sen. Ogden and I have dis
cussed this. The initiatives
have nothing to do with quo
tas, preferential treatment,
lowering of standards or the
MAIL CALL
like. They are intended, as
the Senator said, simply to
make this campus a more
welcoming one for all,
repeat all, members of the
Aggie family.
Robert M. Cates
Texas A&M President
Bush targets Iraq
for a reason
In response to Brieanne
Porter's Jan. 15 column:
Porter's argument that the
Bush administration hasn't
recognized North Korea as a
dangerous threat is prepos
terous. On several instances
since Sept. 11, 2001, I have
heard Bush include North
Korea with Iraq in the axis
of evil. Porter quotes the
Associated Press on news
that has already happened.
North Korea has already
built such a weapon during
the time in which it was in
agreement with the Nuclear
Non-Proliferation Treaty.
She goes on to say, "The
Bush administration has
stated repeatedly that it
would prefer a diplomatic
approach to the situation."
Porter doesn't seem to
understand that Iraq is
more dangerous because it
has used weapons in the
past.
In a card game knowing
your opponents hand often
yields to confident play.
Knowing that North Korea
has a nuclear program with
weapons is better than not
knowing and fearing what
Saddam is hiding.
The Bush administration
has tackled the North
Korean problem in a diplo
matic way through econom
ic sanctions. Here Porter
states that the United
Nations should have
imposed sanctions after
North Korea withdrew from
the Nuclear Non-
Proliferation Treaty. What
more sanctions could you
impose? Lets just take their
food away and let them
starve and see if they want
to fight.
Imposing more sanctions
is not the answer to this
solution. Bush doesn't want
to starve the North Koreans
to war. We also don't want
to fight a war on two fronts.
Lets take on one evil at a
time, and live to fight the
next one.
I also wanted to comment
that slandering two national
leaders is not good policy.
You can't say that Jong II is
a porn lover based on a car
toon in an editorial, nor
should you wrongfully or
ignorantly question a
President's policy.
David A. Johnston
Class of 2005
Socializing Texas higher education dangerous
T
KELLN
ZIMMER
The Battalion encourages let
ters to the editor. Letters must be
200 words or less and include
the author's name, class and
phone number. The opinion edi
tor reserves the right to edit let
ters for length, style and accuracy.
Letters may be submitted in per
son at 014 Reed McDonald with a
valid student ID. Letters also may
be mailed to: 014 Reed
McDonald, MS 1111, Texas A&M
University, College Station, TX
77843-1111. Fax: (979) 845-2647
Email: mailcall@thebatt.com.
Attachments are not accepted.
Ihe cost of public education
in Texas could soon be on
the rise for at least half of
the state’s residents if a group of
Texas legislators and education
officials has its
way. The Dallas
Morning News
reported on Jan.
10 that the
state’s top public
university offi
cials are asking
the Texas
Legislature to
give them the power of setting
their own tuition rates.
The plan, first unveiled to the
University of Texas Board of
Regents in December by Mark
Yudolf, UT System Chancellor,
would call for the Texas
Legislature to relinquish its year
ly duty of setting public school
tuition rates and would pass the
task on to the universities them
selves. Universities already have
control of fees they bill to stu
dents; fees which make up the
majority of student costs. These
have been steadily rising, and if
the power to set tuition rates is
given to unelected university offi
cials, there is no telling how high
the price of public education in
Texas will explode. Given the $30
million that Texas A&M is asking
the government for this year,
either students or the public will
pay more, or A&M will have to
go without. Sen. Steve Ogden, R-
Bryan, is quoted in the Dallas
Morning News article as saying,
“If you totally deregulate tuition.
I’d be hard pressed to explain to
anyone how public universities
would be any different from
SMU.”
According to the plan
described by Yudolf, there is a
possibility that tuition and fees
will be waived for students with
family incomes less than the
$41,000 state median. This would
affect more than half of the fami
lies in Texas. The average cost of
attending a Texas public institu
tion is slightly more than $2,800,
according to the National Center
for Public Policy and Higher
Education. The costs of attending
Texas schools has risen more than
63 percent in the last decade;
Texas tuition rates are currently
$44 per credit hour.
In the Dec. 14 edition of the
Austin American Statesman,
Yudolf addressed the UT Board of
Regents, telling them, “We can
take care of one heck of a lot of
Texans if you’ll let us manage it. If
you want to give the Board of
Regents the authority over tuition
. . . we'll make sure we can take
care of at least half of all Texas
families.”
It would seem that by waiving
tuition and fees for more than half
of the families in Texas while
doubling it for the rest would
leave no real surplus of funds for
universities. It is unreasonable to
think that students from higher-
income families should be forced
to pay higher tuition rates for the
same education as lower-income
families. Financial aid and schol
arships should be used to expand
accessibility to the university
rather than selectively increasing
tuition. The beauty of the Texas
system of higher education is the
fact that tuition rates are reason
able enough to allow many Texas
families to afford to send their
children to Texas schools.
The state is facing a $10 billion
state deficit, and with that news
there is expected to be no addi
tional funding for A&M or UT in
the coming year. This creates a
prime environment for the deregu
lation issue to be pushed to pas
sage. Proponents will argue that if
the state cannot provide schools
with the funds they need, then uni
versities should be allowed to
acquire funds in other ways. Gov.
Rick Perry, Comptroller Carole
Keeton Strayhorn, and possibly
House Speaker Tom Craddick
have all been reported to be in
support of deregulation.
It is a noble goal to attempt to
exempt students from tuition, thus
granting access to higher educa
tion to a much broader range of
Texans, but unfortunately, that is
not the goal of tuition deregula
tion, and it should not be seen as
such by Texans. Saying that half
of Texas families will not pay
tuition is a piece of rhetoric
offered by proponents of deregu
lation in order to obtain its pas
sage. This is not an issue about
making Texas education more
affordable or accessible; it is
about making money at the
expense of Texas families.
Students and their families
should be aware of the deregula
tion issue and voice their con
cerns. The issue of tuition deregu
lation has a strong possibility of
passing during the Legislative ses
sion that convened this week.
Legislators should cherish the sys
tem, the quality, and the afford
ability of Texas public universi
ties. University officials should
not be given unlimited control of
their school tuition rates. Just as it
is the responsibility of the Texas
government to ensure the quality
of its public education, it is also
Texas’ responsibility to ensure
that higher education remains
within the economic grasps of all
Texas families.
Kelln Zimmer is a senior
english major.