IW':.
'Texas
emifl
ssest
itufa
e (let;:
:sgovi
itk
arriae:
it isfit
\enir
'same-
lent ik
s coit
lion to:
teas
.sexpe-
ticipa:
Iso be
s. If«
re chiffi
is cole
enbe
Opinion
The Ba i(auon
Page 5B • Thursday. March 4, 2004
Where did the jobs go?
Americans cannot accept the outsourcing of domestic work to foreign countries
I n the 1990s Americans
saw some of the greatest
economic prosperity in
U.S. history. The influx of
new computer and communi
cations technology, combined
with the pro-growth economic
policies of former President
Clinton, created more than 22
million domestic jobs. The
nation experienced record job
expansion, stable growth in the stock market and
the first budget surplus in decades.
Unfortunately, those times of prosperity have
changed, partly due to the enormous amount of
outsourcing of domestic jobs overseas.
Nearly three million jobs have been lost since
President George W. Bush took office. Many of
the jobs that have disappeared are manufacturing
jobs throughout the Midwest and in the heart
land, where corporate fat cats seek to increase
the size of their wallets by shipping good-paying
industrial jobs to nations where they can hire
cheap labor and avoid environmental regulations.
Many of these corporate executives are some of
the largest contributors to both the Republican
Party and Bush's re-election campaign. Thus, it
isnosurprise that N. Gregory Mankiw, chairman
of Bush's council of economic advisers, said in a
recent economic report that outsourcing was
good for the American economy.
Mankiw and Bush are out of touch with
American workers, especially those who have
lost their jobs due to outsourcing. According to
salon.com. many of the jobs being sent overseas
aren’t just in manufacturing but are white-collar
service sector jobs as well. For example, if a
person calls a customer-assistance help line for
instructions on how to use a new computer, there
isagood chance the representative one is talk
ing to is in India or Thailand. Many of the types
ofjobs economists hoped would replace the dis
appearing domestic manufacturing jobs are
being shipped overseas. This poses a serious
threat to long-term economic growth in the
Med States.
Hie combination of manufacturing and serv-
ice-related jobs being outsourced and sent
overseas is having a devastating impact on the
U.S, economy. For instance, citizens in Ohio
have lost 192,000 jobs since Bush took office.
Nearly one-fourth of those were due to out
sourcing. When a person loses a job, their abil
ity to purchase goods and services is dimin
ished substantially, which reduces total demand
in the economy. Furthermore, without incomes,
citizens pay less taxes, causing a reduction in
the tax base needed to fund various government
programs and services. The loss of more than
three’million jobs, combined with Bush's irre
sponsible tax cuts that disproportionately bene
fit the wealthy, has created a record budget
deficit as well. It is no surprise that the loss of
American jobs, many due to outsourcing, is
wreaking havoc on our economy and way of
life.
The United States is no longer the only nation
in the world that has a substantially educated
workforce. Countries such as China and India
now have substantial amounts of educated citi
zens eager to find work. They are willing and
able to work for a fraction of the wages U.S. citi
zens do. Without any real protections and laws
preventing jobs from being outsourced overseas,
corporate executives have no reason to keep jobs
here in America. If they can make huge profits at
the expense of dedicated employees and workers,
they will more than likely take advantage of the
cheap labor and educated workforces abroad.
The American worker can take steps necessary
to preventing the rise of outsourcing. For starters,
workers must not shy away from organizing
unions to create substantial collective bargaining
powers that will give them a voice with their
employers. As the nation recently saw with super
market workers on strike and a lockout in south
ern California, organized labor still has great
power and influence in protecting American jobs.
Additionally, workers must vote for officials
who will look out for them and their jobs and
not protect the corporate executives who dig
deep into their pockets to fund the campaigns of
Bush and his friends. Having elected officials on
the side of ordinary Americans who work hard
and play by the rules is perhaps one of the best
assets a factory worker or engineer can have in
preventing his job from going overseas. Until
Americans wake up and understand the threat
that outsourcing has on their livelihood, and
until they take action to prevent the hemorrhag
ing of domestic jobs overseas, this unfortunate
trend will continue.
Jonathan Steed is a senior
political science major.
Graphic by Grade Arenas
JONATHAN
STEED
Church must re-evaluate zero tolerance policy
S ince January 2002, nearly 700 Catholic
priests accused of sexually assaulting
children have been removed from
churches in accordance with U.S. bishops’
zero-tolerance policy. However, a recent report
issued by the Vatican makes the dangerous
contention that this policy is more conducive
to furthering abuse by distancing sex offenders
from the church and releasing them unsuper
vised into society.
The report insists that a policy of zero toler
ance is an overreaction, when evidence shows
that, if anything, zero tolerance “has barely been enacted, and it
has been very sporadically enforced,” David Clohessy, a leading
advocate for abuse victims, told The New York Times. To relax the
policy further would sanction keeping pedophile priests in posi
tions of moral authority, a situation inexcusably dangerous for
potential victims.
The Vatican report, “Sexual Abuse in the Catholic Church:
Scientific and Legal Perspectives," condemns zero tolerance as an
“abdication of responsibility” by the church, according to The Los
Angeles Times. However, the church's role is to provide religious
teaching, not criminal punishment or rehabilitation.
Employing sex offenders as moral leaders is contrary to the
purpose of the church: the responsibility of disciplining these
monsters rightly belongs to law enforcement and criminal justice
officers. Keeping child molesters closer to God by keeping them
in the parishes puts the people to whom the church ministers at
risk. Rather than endangering congregations, bishops should
relinquish disciplinarian and rehabilitation therapy to the courts.
This is an appropriate transference of responsibility, not an abdi
cation.
The real “abdication of responsibility” being committed by the
church is in allowing bishops to turn a blind eye to offenses.
While defending the zero-tolerance policy of the American
Catholic Church, Bishop Wilton D. Gregory, president of the U.S.
Conference of Catholic Bishops, assured the public that “known
offenders are not in ministry. The terrible history recorded here
today is history.” However, the network of abuse victims was quick
to point out that nine bishops who were reported abusers were
allowed to continue actively in ministry, and some were even per
mitted to stay in the parishes, according to The New York Times.
Bishops have also shirked the responsibility of publicly releas
ing removed priests’ names as a preventative measure and warning
for future neighbors. There is no need for these criminals to be
released anonymously into society, which is one of the main com
plaints against zero tolerance. Proper public notification of crimi
nal history provides a more suitable remedy for promoting a safe
society than allowing sex offenders to remain in the society of the
church does.
The statistics supply staggering evidence for this claim. In a
study released by the John Jay College of Criminal Justice, the
dioceses and religious orders surveyed confessed that 10,667 chil
dren had been molested by 4,392 priests between 1950 and 2002.
Twenty-seven percent of these crimes included oral sex and 25
percent involved a priest penetrating the child.
Repeat offenders constitute the majority of these crimes, a
compelling reason to enforce a policy of zero tolerance if children
are to be protected. Twenty-seven percent of all accusations were
against a group of only 149 priests, each of whom had at least 10
instances of abuse.
One has trouble understanding how keeping these priests in the
ministry curtailed abuse, or how removing them could have been
detrimental to society. The church congregation is a segment of
society, too.
Although William Marshall, a co-author of the Vatican report,
declared that zero tolerance “is certain to have disastrous conse
quences, including the clergy sex offender committing suicide or
re-offending,” his concerns are misplaced, because hypothetical
victims are given more thought than real abuse survivors.
Evidence from the John Jay study more than confirms the prob
lem of repeat offenders long before zero tolerance was put into
place and in instances when zero tolerance was not enforced. Zero
tolerance does not cause repeat offenses. Concerning suicide, the
death of a sex offender would be tragic as a loss of human life, but
if one had to choose, a criminal’s self-inflicted death seems a
preferable consequence when weighed against the devastating
effects that a person would produce by sexually abusing a child.
At least in that event, he can no longer be a threat to society.
Though it could stand to be improved, the zero-tolerance poli
cy, cannot be relaxed if integrity, safety and trust are to be found
in the relationship between the Catholic Church and its members.
Responsibility for the effective implementation of the policy ulti
mately rests on the bishops. According to the John Jay study, only
14 percent of accused priests were ever reported by their bishops
to the police, an alarming abdication of responsibility that can no
longer go unpunished.
Lindsay Orman is a senior
English major.
LINDSAY
ORMAN
Hotard models Ag traditions
In response to a March 2 mail call:
Closing Hotard Hall in theory should not lessen
terespect for tradition that its residents have, but it
lillnot provide the opportunity for future residents to
e as inspired. It is the smallest dorm on campus,
ihich brings a closeness that is not felt in most other
orms. Their enduring dorm unity inspires residents
be more involved with Aggie Tradition, as a whole,
tan students from larger dorms or those that live off-
ampus.
There is a night-and-day difference between the
tmosphere in the larger modular dorms and the
Ider style dorms such as Hotard. There is no doubt
mind that older dorms are the reason why tra-
ition has not faded more than it has on Texas A&M’s
ampus.
Removing the unique spirit of Hotard Hall will
iect the Aggie Spirit by further sterilizing the
iiqueness of A&M’s on-campus living experience. It
MAIL CALL
affects more than just the current residents; it affects
the campus as a whole by eliminating Hotard as a
center to inspire residents to continue tradition.
Beth Weisinger
Class of 2006
It’s manners: Men should
treat women with respect
In response to a March 3 mail call:
To word it similarly to what was written in this mail
call, it seems that one Aggie in particular needs an
obvious lesson in social poise: Men should treat all
women with respect, regardless of their so-called
beliefs. While I understand his frustration at being
asked to stand when there were empty seats avail
able, this kind of selfishness and arrogance is
appalling. Last time I checked, it was not only the
members of the Corps of Cadets who stand up so that
women may have a seat on the bus, nor should they
be the only ones expected to do so. In case you
haven't taken a good look around, we are in Texas,
where respect and manners are taken seriously, and
women around here are very conscious of that. Of
course women are as physically able to stand as men,
but why be disrespectful and make them? I personal
ly think it is wonderful that the Corps takes pride in its
manners, and I am proud that those three members
took the time to defend what they believe in. To all you
boys out there, take note. Manners and respect are
very important to all women, even in something that
might seem small to you, like giving up your seat on
the bus. To you, Mr. Ford: Good luck getting a date.
Kelly Doan
Class of2005
High standards OK for players
In response to Matt Rigney’s March 2 column:
I do not see how Mr. Rigney can state that Texas
A&M football players shouldn't be considered repre
sentatives of the University. Every student who
attends A&M is a representative of the University and
their actions may reflect positively or negatively on
the image of the University.
Football players should be held at an even higher
level of responsibility than the average student
because they are public figures. Their actions should
be scrutinized more closely simply because they are
more well-known on campus and in the community.
The team bears the insignia of A&M and represents
all Aggies. If a member cannot handle the responsi
bility associated with being a public figure, they
should not be on the football team or involved in any
highly visible university organization.
To say that football players, who draw thousands
to Kyle Field per game, should not be held to a high
er standard is just plain ridiculous. They need to set
a positive example for the students of this university
and need to shine a positive light on Texas A&M in
the surrounding community.
Jennifer Herendeen
Graduate student