June 30, 2003
)3 6:46 at
rized use of motor*
Harvey.
13 8:54 a.m. Warm
2611 Texas. Cliarje
13 8:54 a.m. War®
2611 Texas. Charge
3 11:29 p.m. Accidert
jn, 102 UniversityDi,[
?ain to left knee.
3 12:09 p.m. War®
il 1 Texas.
3 12:32 p.m. War®
19 Sandy Point.
3 1:08 p.m. Burglaiyd
ig, 1101 Rock Prarif
aken.
3 12:25 p.m. War®
0 E. 26th.
3 2:29 p.m. War®
07 Maloney.
3 2:25 p.m. War®
4 Luther.
5 8:48 p.m. Major am
1 2154/Rock Prarii
t of pain, bloodynost
5 8:37 p.m. Failure!!
117 Holleman. to
jossession.
5 8:13 p.m. Sexui!
100 Block Luther,
i 12:03 a.m. Weapons
Holleman/Eleanoi
t.
i 12:43 a.m. Ding
oxicated, 400 Marion
! arrest.
5 2:09 a.m. Driving
intoxicated,
J Diversity.
2:01 a.m. Aggravated
17 University. Head
4:07 a.m. Burglaryol
m, 1810 Holleman.
7:07 a.m. Burglaryof
2815 Longmire,
reo.
9:12 a.m. Burglaryol
!, 2905 Normand,
ital camcorder andtri-
9:28 a.m. War®!
Walton.
10:01 a.m. Bufl
ation, 3939 SH fi
tal camcorder tak
10:19 a.m. Deceased
04 Rock Prarie.
11:54 a.m. Burglar)
:le, 2701 Longmii!
eo.
12:15 p.m. Burglar)
:le, 4708 Camargo
ar detector.
1:03 p.m. Burlgaryoi
2220 Texas. Taken:
is, cell phone, wallet
IDs, stereo.
1:17 p.m. Burglaryol
1800 Treehouse
flayer.
3:08 p.m. Warranl
) Augustine.
5:59 p.m. Burglaryof
405 Summit. Taken:
4:43 p.m. Warrant
George Bush.
7:22 p.m. Resisting
ng, failure to idenli
er. One arrest.
>:40 p.m. Burglaryol
2701 Longmire
layer, tools.
:14 p.m. Major acci-
A/Valton. Complain!
:53 p.m. Injury toi
v/invalid, 2611
1:24 p.m. Warranl
Iniversity Dr E.
M :38 p.m. Liquor
i, 313 S. College
12:29 a.m. Liquor
i, 313 S. College
2:43 a.m. Failure !o
' S. College. One
30 a.m. Warrant
ounty.
43 a.m. Warrant
wy/Glade.
5:32 a.m. Public
1400 University.
D:34 p.m. Making
able to a minor,
77. One arrest.
':46 p.m. Minor in
arking Area 77,
:43 p.m. Minor in
arking Area 77.
11:43 p.N'
nduct (exposure)
in possession,
7.
1:51 p.m. Theft,
iken: S25 from 3
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 5 • Monday, June 30, 2003
Funding public education
No Child Left Behind Act, budget cuts worsen primary and secondary schools
E arlier this month, the National Assessment of
Educational Progress, considered the nation's
report card, released its results on the read
ing proficiency of students across the nation. It
found that when it comes to reading, American stu
dents simply don’t do well. Only about one-third
of fourth, eighth and 12th-graders read at their
appropriate grade level. And while the 31 percent proficiency for
fourth-graders is a slight improvement of a 2 percent increase
from four years ago, the proficiency of high school seniors has
dropped by 4 percent.
Education Secretary Rod Paige is quoted by CNN as saying,
“There are no scientific answers as to why our high school sen
iors have performed so poorly on this reading assessment, but
we’re still searching for solutions to these daunting challenges.”
Is America’s pathetic record on financing primary and second
ary education a scientific enough answer?
Education spending is always a popular way to garner votes
during political campaigns, but little seems to come of these
promises. In 2000, the George W. Bush campaign adopted the
long-held Children’s Defense Fund motto “Leave No Child
Behind” as a slogan to illustrate how much Bush cares about edu
cation in America. The motto was even adopted as the name of
education reform legislation Bush signed into law on Jan. 8,
2002.
However, like every other education-related promise, little will
come of this law unless government officials prove that they are
serious about change. If students are to succeed, schools must be
provided with adequate resources to properly teach them.
Education funding must not be one of the first places govern
ment officials cut spending, and “accountability” must not be an
excuse for the government to skimp on its obligations to
American students.
The No Child Left Behind Act emphasizes the accountability
of schools. Students in schools that do not perform well are free
to transfer at the expense of their original school. This policy,
however, does little to help students. It only makes the situation
of schools worse.
John Wilhelmi, principal of Marshall High School in Portland,
Ore., told The Washington Post how this policy affects his school:
“For every 30 students we lose, we lose a teacher. You lose teach
ers, and you cut programs. You cut programs, and you attract
fewer students. It’s a vicious cycle downward.”
The state of Texas is also guilty of forcing school districts into
a “vicious cycle downward.” Schools that perform poorly on the
Texas Assessment of Knowledge and Skills test get their funding
cut as well, which is the exact opposite of what should happen.
's the poorer districts that are not performing well. Making them
poorer by cutting the money supply makes absolutely no sense.
JENELLE WILSON
It’s ridiculous to think that poorly performing
schools will improve with less money — they didn’t
have enough money to begin with. Yes, schools
should be accountable for their students’ per
formances, but it is not solely the
school’s fault. The state and the
national government are to blame for
poorly performing students.
Schools need more money; it’s as simple as
that. Schools need money to hire more and better
teachers. They need money to reduce class size.
They need money to provide programs that will
prepare students for the real world. Schools
need money that does not seem to be forth
coming.
While the No Child Left Behind Act
increased federal funding for schools by
40 percent, the funding still accounts for less
than 10 percent of K-12 spending nationally,
according to The Washington Post. This leaves
schools susceptible to large budget cuts when
states need to free up some money. Due
to the current economic crises faced by
state governments, more than one-third of
states are cutting school financing by mil
lions, and in some cases — such as
California — billions of dollars.
These budget cuts will only make the
situation worse, and unless the national
government does more to help American
students, millions will be left behind.
Without better funding, there is no
way the No Child Left Behind Act’s goal
that every student be proficient in reading
by 2013 will be met. Right now, that goal
is nothing more than a pipe dream.
Politicians need to stop talking about
education funding and start doing some
thing to improve the situation of millions
of American children. They need to put
their money where their mouths are. They Jj
need to stop cutting money for schools
and educational programs; otherwise,
American students will continue to fail.
Jenelle Wilson is a senior
political science major.
Graphic by Grade Arenas.
Bush’s decision on generic drugs praiseworthy
O n June 12, President
George W. Bush
announced the implemen
tation of new FDA rules that
improve consumer access to
generic drugs. For Bush, such a
move is very significant as he has
not always supported generic drugs over their
patented counterparts. As governor of Texas, he
signed into law House Bill 2571, a 1997 law
that made it tougher for doctors to prescribe the
generic blood-thinner Warfarin over its brand-
name equivalent, Coumadin. With this in mind,
Bush should be commended for supporting
these new measures, which prevent drug com
panies from blocking other manufacturers seek
ing to sell low-cost generic drugs.
Currently, a 17 to 20 yearlong patent is
awarded to a drug company that develops a
new drug. By giving this company the exclu
sive right to sell the drug, the patent helps pro
tect the corporation’s investment in it. Patents
also provide pharmaceutical companies with
an incentive for developing new medicines.
When a patent expires, other companies can
sell generic versions of the drug. Because
those manufacturers don’t have
the same development costs, they
can sell their product at substan
tial discounts. The entry of the
generic drug into the market also
lowers prices by increasing com
petition.
Lately, however, drug corporations have
been increasingly dissatisfied with their 20-
year monopolies: the longer they can dominate
the market, the longer they realize multi-billion
dollar profits. Drug manufacturers began pre
venting generic drugs from entering the market
using loopholes in the Hatch-Waxman Act of
1984. Ironically, the law itself was designed to
encourage inexpensive alternatives to drugs
whose patents had expired.
The most common approach was a lawsuit.
When any drug maker tried to enter the market
with its generic drug, the original manufacturer
would sue under the Hatch-Waxman Act. This
action guaranteed a 30-month delay in which a
court would solve the patent issues and the
company could further monopolize the market.
Afterwards, the original company could file
another suit over a second patent violation,
however minor, and gain 30 additional months.
In fact, a study by the Federal Trade
Commission noted that of the eight major drug
companies that filed a suit since 1998, five
alleged a breach of three or more patents.
Compare this to the fact that only one out of
nine companies did so before 1998.
The new regulations, then, could not have
come at a better time. They limit the brand-
name drug company to one 30-month freeze.
The rules also prevent companies from obtain
ing patent extensions for trivial innovations,
such as new packaging or new pill shape.
Issuing a patent extension for such paltry dif
ferences was not only unfair to the consumer,
but it belied the very principle of originality
upon which patent rights are based.
AstraZeneca, the pharmaceutical company
that developed the hugely successful anti-heart
burn medication Prilosec gives a perfect exam
ple of such tactics. The patent for Prilosec hav
ing expired in 2001, AstraZeneca filed a new
patent claim describing how Prilosec could be
added over applesauce as a powder, aiding
patients who have trouble swallowing pills.
Any generic competitors would then have to
prove that their versions, too, could be sprin
kled on applesauce. As rudimentary as it
sounds, the “applesauce test” would require
more testing of the generic drug, resulting in
more delays that would prevent more patients
who could swallow pills from receiving cheap
er medication.
Some say that the rules are not helpful since
it is healthier and safer to take brand-name
pharmaceuticals. This is blatantly incorrect. A
generic drug has the same active ingredients as
the brand-name drug and is shown to work
identically in the body. Furthermore, the FDA
holds generic drugs to identical testing stan
dards and verifies that they are equal to brand-
name drugs in strength, quality and purity.
The new regulations will be very beneficial.
According to the FDA, the typical prescription
cost for a patented drug is $72. The cost for its
generic equivalent is only $17. Overall, the
new rules are slated to save American con
sumers $3.5 billion annually. Bush's regulations
then are a step in the right direction. They not
only protect the interests of consumers, but
uphold legitimate patent rights as well.
Midhat Farooqi is a senior
genetics major.
MIDHAT FAROOQI
Affirmative Action only
encourages racism
The continuation of Affirmative
Action is a defeat for all who have
worked for racial equality. Rather than
saying that all people are equally
capable regardless of skin color, the
Supreme Court sent the message that
they do not feel that minorities are
able to perform competitively. Once
again, the Democratic Party's
attempts to keep minorities impover
ished, ignorant and dependent meet
with success.
Equality will never be found by giv
ing some additional advantages over
others for no reason other than
superficial reasons, nor will racism be
overcome by telling people that race
is an important factor or that any race
is greater than any other. Affirmative
action will have no positive social
^percussions in this or subsequent
decades, but it will do much to fur
ther the cause of racism.
James Floyd
Class of 2006
Deregulation is likely
to be abused in practice
In response to Michael Ward's June 25
column:
Michael Ward admonishes us all to not
worry, don't panic and trust the school
administrators to make the right deci
sions. Well, there's the question, isn't it.
Do we really trust school administrators
to make the best decisions? Aside from
various Vision 2020 initiatives which
people may or may not agree with, there
is a deeper, more important issue: Since
when has any bureaucratic entity ever
reined in its own spending? Answer: It
hasn't.
We see this all the time in government
on the federal and state level, as well as
MAIL CALL
in large corporations. It's the same cycle
here: the economy is good for a while,
so there is more spending; then, later
when A&M runs out of money, what
does it do? Why, lament that there is not
enough money for programs and raise
fees again.
I recall a Battalion opinion article from
last semester that asked students to vote
against a wasteful Rec Center fee
increase. That's just typical of what any
bureaucracy does: never a thought of
cutting costs, only of raising spending.
Of course, we used to have a control
on this spending in the form of regulat
ed tuition. And I liked that it gave fiscal
boundaries school officials could work
within. Now the boundaries are much
larger and prone to error, and there are
no controls. "Demand" for the educa
tional product, or lack thereof, will not
stop administrators from being less fis
cally responsible than they were forced
to be before. To me that's the main issue.
From the book Black & White World www.CoxAndForkum.com
Jonathan Drum
Class of 2001