SPORTS
THE BAITALIOS
rivalry
WS
Opimon
The Battalion
age 5 • Monday, June
outscored losers 33-
closest game was
4-2 victory over
:st Missouri State,
the first four games,
ns were scoring an
of 9.75 runs per
SNAKE BIT:
st Missouri Stale
Bob Zimmermann
feel snake bit, even
is 4 1/2-foot pet boa
with him to Omalia,
e’s name? Omaha,
ermann said he
ie snake and named it
home of the College
eries two years ago.
e hoped it would help
make it to the series,
ked.
rake didn't make it to
at for the Bears’ fits!
urday, a 4-2 loss to
Zimmermann hopes
ke it to the stadium to
e team some luck
: series ends,
vest Missouri State
imi on Monday in an
n game.
HOYS: Cal-State
players Jason
and Justin Turner
bats for the Titans
ire they swung them,
erved as bat boys for
about 10 years ago,
er’s father went to
ith Titans assistant
:k Vanderhook, the
ordinator.
players started
game
i, a senior, was beat
1 second base job by
freshman, before the
at Corapci returned
second when Turner
ihprtstop.
Attention Gov. Rick Perry
Tution deregulation will hurt Texas A&M University and potential Aggies
MATT MADDOX
W ith the
2 0 - d a y
deadline
to veto bills near
ing, there is one
piece of legislation
that Gov. Rick Perry should take a second look at
before adding his signature. HB 3015, the bill that
would give unelected regents unlimited tuition
charging ability, is perhaps the worst idea ever for
Texas A&M and public higher education. As one
Aggie to another, Gov. Perry please veto tuition
deregulation.
A&M’s heritage is one of an affordable public
college serving students of all economic classes.
This has been possible through low tuition rates
established by the Texas Legislature. Now, for the
first time in the University System’s 127-year-his-
tory, the Legislature is willing to forfeit its control
to regents. University officials have assured the
public that they will not take advantage of their
new power and price gouge. However, Harrison
Keller, senior policy analyst for Texas House of
Representatives Speaker Tom Craddick and a
major force behind the bill has said otherwise,
stating that, “Students should pay whatever the
market will bare.” If unlimited tuition passes, it is
simply a matter of time before rates are raised
beyond what the public and the Legislature deem
acceptable. There is no other reason for transfer
ring the decision-making power out of the hands
of the Legislature.
Some proponents of the plan to surrender
tuition-setting power to bureaucrats have even
fooled themselves into believing that the plan is
“deregulation.” Deregulation means more capi
talism and less government.
But this is not the case with unlimited tuition.
Tuition deregulation simply takes the power
from one government body that answers to the
public and gives it to one that does not. Tuition
deregulation is not free-market, but instead a
license to spend. Despite being assured that the
Board of Regents listens to the public, we saw
how much the regents cared when current and
former student organizations spoke before the
Board during the A&M presidential selection
process in 2002.
With unlimited tuition comes a number of neg
ative consequences. Fewer students will be able to
pay their way through college, meaning more stu
dents will require financial aid or be forced out of
A&M. The current deregulation plan includes a
20 percent additional rate hike for the expressed
purpose of subsidizing lower-income students.
This takes one out of every five new dollars raised
ment if unlimited tuition is passed, preventing
Texans from receiving a future education at the
current college price.
Another blow to A&M under unlimited
tuition is the loss of its competitive pricing
advantage. As the cost of attending A&M nears
the cost of attending any out-c c -
state or private school,
the University will
lose its greatest
through deregulation and puts it directly
into the pocket of another student. This kind of
socialism means middle-income students will pay
a higher price for the same education as their
lower-income peers.
Additionally, any benefits realized by the 20
percent provision will be offset by the demise of
the Texas Tomorrow Fund, a program that has
allowed thousands of Texas families to pay their
way through college. The state comptroller has
already said the program will have to end enroll
means of attracting top stu
dents. When future Aggies no longer save
money by attending a public university, the best
and brightest students will have fewer reasons to
attend A&M, effectively causing a brain-drain
of the best students out of the A&M System.
Proponents of the bill have painted it as a do-
or-die situation. They say that without unlimited
tuition, A&M will face large budget cutbacks.
This is simply not true. If the universities need
more funds, the Legislature can simply raise the
cap on how much regents may charge students.
There is no need for the Legislature to divest
itself of its tuition-setting power. If schools need
the tuition hike, then simply give them one.
While regents have requested more funding
from the Legislature since the earliest days of the
University system, only recently have increases in
the costs of attending A&M far outpaced infla
tion. This wave of spending is in the name of the
Vision 2020 plan, goals based on the highly dis
credited U.S. News & World Report university
rankings. This year, deans at 178 law
schools around the country signed a letter
criticizing ranking systems for being arbi
trary in the importance they place on the cri
teria they compare schools with. “A ranking
system that exemplifies the shortcomings of
all ‘by the numbers’ schemes is the one pro
duced annually by U.S. News & World
Report,” the letter read. Newsweek editor
Kenneth Auchincloss wrote, “Rankings
generate huge hype, which is far more like
ly to serve the publisher’s purpose than the
readers...’” Hype is not an important
enough objective to make higher education
unaffordable.
Only during a year of budget crisis did
our elected officials consider giving away
their responsibility to set tuition caps.
Perry should hold off on signing HB 3015
into law, allowing legislators to make such
a choice later, when they aren’t brow-beat
en by special interest groups fearing fund
ing cuts.
Hopefully Perry will see through this
power play disguised as deregulation, so
that Texans of all economic levels will be able
to afford to call themselves Aggies.
Matt Maddox is a senior
management major.
Graphic by Ruben DeLuna.
RVIVOR: Soutl)
victory over LSI'
iday left Ik
;s as the only
irn Conference
ie series. At least
:am has won two or
is in Omaha every
1995. Last year,
■olina lost in the
hip game to Texas.
11:10 a.m. Burglaiyof
1107 Holik. Tate
stereo.
.1:15 a.m. Burglaryof
7 00 Dominik. Tate
FM CD Stereo, Cobra
or.
2:44 p.m. Burglaryol
101 University Oaks
layer.
J:53 p.m. Recovered
30 Navarro.
3:31 p.m. Warrant
tolgate.
4:48 p.m. Warrant
exas.
4:52 p.m. Warrant
Pintail.
5:15 p.m. Warrant
Holleman.
6:37 p.m.
use of motor vehicle,
kway. Also: theft of a
arrest.
3:45 p.m. Criminal
lary of a habitation,
/rtle.
0:59 p.m. Making
ble, 313 S. College.
:16 p.m.
use of a motor vehi-
ock Prarie. Taken:
) Wrangler.
2:18 a.m. Making
ble, 217 University.
)5 a.m. Makingalco-
217 University. One
16 a.m. Making alco-
217 University. One
8 a.m. Making alco-
217 University. One
13 a.m. Possession
1600 Texas. One
•0 a.m. Possession
1600 Texas. One
Fetal rights undermine privacy of women
O n May 7, U.S. Rep. Melissa Hart,
R-Pa., reintroduced the Unborn
Victims of Violence Act, a piece
of legislation that pro-life groups and
lawmakers have been clamoring, but
failing, to pass for the past few legisla
tive sessions. They are likely to succeed
this time, however, because they have
help—from Laci Peterson and her
unborn child. The pro-life legislators
who sponsored the bill have gone so far
as to call it “Laci and Connor’s Law,”
showing they are not above exploiting
the tragic death of a pregnant women to
get what they want—the demise of a
woman’s right to choose.
Laci and Connor’s Law does nothing
to protect pregnant women from vio
lence or homicide, and because it only
applies to federal crimes — those com
mitted on federal property the bill
itself will be used little. The only effect
it will have — which indeed is its true
puipose — is to establish the person-
hood of an unborn fetus.
The Unborn Victims of Violence Act
would make the harm to
or death of a fetus during
the commission of certain
federal crimes against the
mother a separate
offense. It would give a
“child in utero” at any
stage of development in the womb, from
little more than a week after conception
to birth, the same legal rights as every
day Americans.
The passage of this law is dangerous
for women. Not only does this fetal
rights principle undermine a woman’s
right to decide her own reproductive
future, it directly pits her fetus’ interests
against her own. By establishing a fetus
as a separate entity from the mother
while still inside her body, it effectively
turns a pregnant woman into little more
than an incubator.
A perfect example of the government
trying to turn women into incubators is
currently taking place in Florida. A 22-
year-old severely mentally retarded
woman known as J.D.S. was raped in a
state mental institution,
resulting in a pregnancy.
Forcing a pregnancy on a
young rape victim who
can neither understand nor
handle her condition is
disgusting, yet that is
exactly what Florida Gov. Jeb Bush is
attempting to do. He has vowed to force
J.D.S. to continue the pregnancy with
complete disregard for what is best for
her, and has tried to get a guardian
appointed for the fetus.
This is not the first attempt to give a
fetus full legal rights. On Oct. 2, 2002,
new Department of Health and Human
Services guidelines extended State
Children’s Health Insurance Program
benefits to fetuses, but not to the preg
nant women themselves. The idea that a
fetus has insurance coverage not avail
able to the mother is ludicrous and com
pletely unworkable.
According to The Orlando Sentinel,
26 states have laws similar to the
Unborn Victims of Violence Act. These
laws have been used to prosecute
women for behavior that is potentially
harmful to a fetus.
South Carolina, for example, has
prosecuted between 50 and 100 women
for such behavior, according to the
National Advocates for Pregnant
Women. Women who have been
deemed to put a pregnancy at risk have
received as many as 10 years in prison,
even though they gave birth to healthy
children. The parents of a 13-year-old
girl were arrested for failing “to get
proper care for the fetus” after their
daughter’s pregnancy resulted in a still
birth, according to The Associated Press.
A woman was arrested and charged with
homicide by child abuse after a miscar
riage, and even though there was no evi
dence of drug abuse in the case, the
prosecutor called the miscarriage a
crime the woman had to take responsi
bility for. One woman was even prose
cuted for not following her doctor’s
order to remain on bed-rest.
Laci and Connor’s Law specifically
exempts women from prosecution, yet
the fetal rights issue is a slippery slope.
Pushing the principle that a fetus is sep
arate and that harm to it should be pun
ished as though it was a full person
leaves the door open for the government
to amend the laws and start prosecuting
pregnant women as well.
Laci Peterson’s murder and the death
of the fetus was tragic, but it should not
be used to pass legislation dangerous to
women. The Unborn Victims of
Violence Act is a clear step in the path to
undermine women’s privacy rights. A
fertilized egg — which would be a
“child” under the law — is not a child
and should not be granted equal or more
rights than the mother. The interests of a
fetus should never be put above the
interests of the woman carrying it.
Jenelle Wilson is a senior
political science major.
JENELLE WILSON
Lack of jobs leaving graduates in a lurch
Economic slump forcing collegians to rethink plans and continue education
(U-WIRE) COLLEGE PARK, Md. — I knew getting my first job
would be tough. As a college senior and aspiring newspaper reporter,
I’ve scrolled through hundreds of journalism job listings on a bevy of
Internet sites — JournalismJobs.com, Editor and Publisher online and
whatever else showed up on the Yahoo! keyword search: Newspaper
Employment.
I’m not a seasoned journalist, but I have experience with college
media and reporting internships in a Pennsylvania county seat and the
heart of London. I’m passionate, eager to learn and ready to relocate.
And so I boldly entered the fray this February, sending cover letters,
resumes, and clips to nearly 40 local and regional newspapers nation
wide. All had advertised an entry-level opportunity and most promised,
“Recent college grads welcome.”
I heard back from five. Only one wanted to meet with me — a
medium-sized daily in a two-newspaper town.
The position offered a pittance of a salary. From past trips to the
region, I remembered the coverage area as lifeless, a mix of muted
farmland, rotting trees and rundown, red-brick buildings. I immediate
ly accepted an interview. I knew how fortunate I was to even be mak
ing the trip.
The recently graduated class of 2003 is educated, fresh-faced, fear
less, ready and waiting, waiting, waiting. The almost complete lack of
growth-potential positions greeting us is overshadowing our personal
excitement and altering professional plans.
Along with classmates, I’ve watched the Dow Jones tumble since
Sept. 11. I’ve seen frequent television reports outlining the layoffs, hir
ing freezes and cutbacks infecting the current job market. I’ve read
more and more about major companies turning like college textbooks
to Chapter 11.
The syrupy slow market, along with a post-Sept. 11 sense of
urgency in fulfilling goals and dreams before it’s too late, has impelled
more collegians than ever before to continue their education.
According to the Associated Press, graduate programs across the coun
try report spiking admission rates, especially in areas of business, law
and education.
To hedge my bets, I joined the higher education onrush in early
December, applying to six graduate journalism programs. This univer
sity accepted me in mid-May. The excitement of the next step and the
school’s standout reputation swelled within me.
And so, I awoke on a recent weekday earlier than freshman year’s
dreaded 8 a.m. I sped along interstates in a tired, nervous stupor to
interview for the reporting position on-site. My thoughts, meanwhile,
were a hundred miles away, filled with an image of rejection.
A fellow college senior, who wants to work in broadcast journalism,
had his dorm walls splattered this past semester with white and beige
rejection letters. The collage of “We’re sorry to inform you” and “More
experience needed” is a disheartening picture for undergraduates to
behold.
There are exceptions, of course. Last fall, my classmate Kyle mas
saged contacts and exhausted leads to land a high-paying post-grad
position at a Big Four accounting firm.
Yet he too saw the rarity that is his secure future, in a Veterans
Stadium super box during an early season baseball outing.
The waiter serving him popcorn and drinks was a friend from his
hometown, two years older and a business-track graduate from a
respected university. In his senior year of high school, he’d been voted
“Most Likely to Succeed.” Six years later, Kyle was tracking him
down during the seventh inning stretch of a Phillies game. He needed
an extra straw.
I lurched into the newspaper building’s parking lot with my stom
ach and fuel tank running on empty. I sat down to wait in the reception
area and perused a newspaper article on how war in Iraq and feared
homeland terrorism were expected to paint an even bleaker economic
picture. I sighed. I knew getting my first job would be tough.
Two weeks later, the e-mail appeared. “We’re sorry to inform
you...”
I enrolled at this university soon after. The experience will hopeful
ly prove priceless. But for now, as the economy has dictated, I’m the
one who’s going to pay.
Dan Reimold is a columnist
at the University of Maryland