11(1
ick
Remembering
Margaret Rudder
Aggies everywhere are deeply saddened by the death of
Margaret Rudder, the first lady of Texas A&M. Rudder died
one week ago today at St. Joseph Regional Health Center
in Bryan. While it is appropriate for the A&M community to
grieve over the loss of a legdnd, this should also be a time
to celebrate Rudder’s incredible life.
The Aggie family was first graced with Rudder’s presence
in 1958 when she moved to College Station with her hus
band, war hero Gen. James Earl Rudder. Gen. Rudder
would become the most important president A&M has ever
had, and his wife built a separate and equally extraordinary
legacy. After Gen. Rudder died in 1970, Mrs. Rudder
remained an invaluable member of the A&M community.
This entire newspaper could be filled with stories of
Rudder’s dedication, loyalty, kindness, grace and her love
for A&M and Aggies. She wrote “The Muster Song” in 1975,
which is sung at every Muster by the Singing Cadets. “The
Muster Song" is an integral part of one of A&M’s most
important traditions.
A&M showed its appreciation to Rudder in various ways.
She was an honorary member of the Singing Cadets. A
Southside residence hall is named in her honor. A Memorial
Student Center leadership award is also in her name. But
none of those tokens could ever equal what Rudder gave
this University.
The title of legend is one to be given away sparingly, but
Rudder surely earned this designation many times over.
She is irreplaceable, and her loss will be felt deeply. From
the bottom of every Aggie’s heart, thank you, Mrs. Rudder.
The Battalion
EDITORIAL BOARD
H:
IlCf:
Editor in Chief
Managing Editor
Opinion Editor
Metro Editor
Elizabeth Webb
Kendra Kingsley
George Deutsch
Melissa Sullivan
Opinion Asst.
Member
Member
Member
Matt Rigney
David Shoemaker
Chris Lively
Collins Ezeanyim
lht Battalion encourages letters to the editor. Letters must be 200 words or
band include the author's name, class and phone number. The opinion editor
rames the right to edit letters for length, style and accuracy. Letters may be sub- -
milled in person at 014 Reed MtfRfrnnld with a valid student ID. Letters also may
(emailed to: 014 Reed McDonald, MS 1111, Texas A&M University, College
ton. TX 77843-1111. Fax: (979) 845-2647 Email: mailcall@thebattalion.net
MAIL CALL
SCA essentially a 'well-funded clique'
In response to Sara Foley’s March 9 column:
lam glad to see that more people are finally coming to the real-
lationthat the SGA, in its current form, is nothing more than a
veil-funded clique that does little (and in many cases, nothing to
iromote student interests or concerns.
When Student Body President Matt Josefy says that most of the
!GA’s work is done “behind the scenes,” he is telling me that most
if its work is done for the benefit of the SGA and not the greater
= tudent body. With the SGA receiving nearly $160,000 in student
—lervice fee appropriations for this school year, the students of
exas A&M should demand to see some type of return on this
ivestment. With student body elections just around the corner, it
1 smy hope that we will start electing student leaders who will stop
vorking “behind the scenes” for the benefit of the SGA and start
rorking in public view to represent all Aggies.
Wesley Dixon
Class of 2007
SGA Watch
Mes defined by more than two issues
lr response to Clint Rainey’s March 9 column:
Clint Rainey's piece filled the word count requirements nicely. It
ould have been equally nice if his 877 words possessed some
leasure of content. Rainey bandied about the terms "conserva-
ve"and "liberal" as if just using those terms is content enough.
In his call for conservatives to rise up and combat liberalism, he
ever defines a conservative or explains what this liberal menace
dually is. The only clue he offers is his explanation about liber
ie wanting more diversity and gay rights. Is he calling for con-
ervatives to openly hate gay people and minorities? Or should
ley just deny them equal rights? Rainey never comes close to
xplaining what these conservatives need to stand for. I would
ke to think that conservatives base their ideology on more than
vo issues. If Rainey truly wants to see the oppressed majority of
onservatives rise up to end liberalism, perhaps he should be
lore specific in his marching orders. But that might mean a more
loughtful consideration of the actual issues, which would mean
lainey might have to put some actual work into his future pieces.
Burton French
Class of 2002
itop playing the MSC Flag Room piano
I felt it necessary to write in about what is going on in the MSC
lag Room. People are playing the piano. I am trying to fall
sleep to the soothing sound of a crowded room and somebody
as the nerve to start playing Moonlight Sonata or Claire de Lune.
Now don't get me wrong. I love the piano and do enjoy the
ccasional Super Mario Bros, theme or even a tune from Rocky,
5 'Ut please stop playing that classical noise. There are plenty of
| tier places downstairs where you can play instead of attempt-
igto "serenade” us while we study or try to pass out in peace
fid quiet.
Charles Holland
Class of 2005
Opinion
HHHBHR' The Battalion Page 9 • Wednesday, March 10. 2004
Student body should hold
administration accountable
A t Texas A&M, removing a
tradition from campus is a
difficult and rare thing, and
it often induces a serious culture
shock. Bonfire was one such event
that caused students to question
the University’s decision-making
processes in events that are stu
dent-run. A shift began to occur david
in student-administration rela- SHOEMAKER
tions. It is not because the quality
of the University’s staff has declined, as
many smart, capable and creative people
work at A&M. The student body has not
declined in quality either. Somehow, the
process in reaching decisions that affect
students has changed.
Now, it seems the University adminis
tration has decided that it knows what is
best for students, and students’ opinions
are no longer important, due to recent
major decisions that were made without
consulting students or even giving them
information about those decisions. Such
issues included the ruckus over the closing
of Hotard Hall, the mishandling of the
Parsons Mounted Cavalry case and the
decisions to close the schools of journalism
and dairy science.
University administrators made impor
tant decisions and then simply presented
them to the affected parties — primarily
students — as a fait accompli, or an act
already done.
These decisions were largely — if not
entirely — made without meaningful stu
dent input. For example, at no time during
the decision-making process to close
Hotard Hall were the residents asked for
their opinions about what was going on.
Even after they were told that a decision
had been made without their input,
the Committee on the Built
Environment did not provide resi
dents with facts to justify its
decision. And after the deci
sion was announced,
administrators tried to
quiet dissent by offer
ing first choice for on-
campus housing and
discounts for the dis
placed residents.
In another instance,
although the University did
provide some information
about its decisions to
close the colleges of
dairy science and journal
ism, none of that informa
tion made an irrefutable
case for closure. Decisions to
close a residence hall or an
academic department are major
ones, which can leave stu
dents in a bind.
In the case of the Parsons
Mounted Cavalry, there were alle
gations of hazing throughout the
unit. Hazing is in violation of
A&M rules and can have serious '
consequences. But the University’s
investigation seems to have gone
wrong from the beginning. In a
matter where students’ careers and
the University’s reputation were at
stake, extra efforts should have
been taken to make sure the inves
tigation weren’t tainted.
According to The Eagle, the accused
cadets were denied the right to an attorney
and were subjected to verbal abuse during
their hearings, among other problems. In
the end, this case of mishandling resulted in
an embarrassing court defeat for the
University. Those in charge of the case
should not have violated the students’ rights
to due process in order to make a case.
With these instances in mind, it seems
as if the administration feels that there is
only one important constituency on campus
— other staff members. Repeatedly, deci
sions are made without proper consultation
of students, in meetings closed to the pub
lic and presented without much, if any, jus
tification. This is unacceptable.
Students are one of the most important
constituencies on campus. As taxpayers,
they are shareholders of the University, and
they pay tuition as customers. Although
student concerns are not always going to
be the most pressing, they still deserve to
be heard. Those in power can afford to take
time out to seek students’ opinions on mat
ters that affect them.
President Gates' tuition forums have
been an imperfect means of accounting for
student opinion. Although at these forums
tuition. The forums still asked for student
input after the fact, not in a constructive
fashion before a decision is made.
One person that actually took the time
to seek student opinions about a decision
that had not been made was Transportation
Services Director Rodney Weis. After out
rage over proposals related to the
Southside Parking Garage, TS and the
Student Senate organized parking forums
to discuss proposed changes to the parking
plan. There, TS representatives answered
questions about future plans and explained
why those plans were made.
Although TS parking plans have been
shelved for now, the idea that students
should have a say in a transparent decision
on other important matters should not be.
Having meetings where students can voice
their opinions on matters before a decision
is made would be much more constructive
than the adversarial confrontations that will
inevitably occur after a decision, such as
the one on the Hotard Hall issue, is made.
And opposition to holding such forums
due to lack of student involvement is not a
valid excuse. True, not every student will
care, but the opinions of those who do still
matter. Perhaps if students know that their
comments will affect a decision’s outcome,
they might be more inclined to participate.
There is nothing more damaging to feel
ings of civic responsibility than being told,
“thanks for your suggestions, but we’re
going to do what we want anyway.”
Student leaders must also push students
to speak out on major issues. The Student
Government Association and other repre
sentative bodies on campus cannot contin
ue to lag behind events on campus. They
need to be more proactive in finding out
about student concerns. In accordance
with this, students should not be afraid of
firing off an e-mail to their senators or
even to University President Robert
M. Gates.
The one thing the A&M
administration and students
should remember is that we
are all in this together. The
University will not remain a
flagship University without
good communication between
those who attend it and those
who run it. There is no rule stat
ing that either side must have
mutually exclusive desires. They
need to overcome their precon
ceptions and work together for
the future.
David Shoemaker is a junior
management major.
Graphic by Chris Grijjjn
Sloan did the right thing by
speaking out against editorial
A nd you thought The Battalion was the only colle
giate paper to be mired in controversy for its
opinion section. The Lariat, Baylor University’s
student newspaper, has found itself in the hot seat
recently due to a controversial editorial praising San
Francisco city officials for seeking to issue marriage
licenses to same-sex couples. But Baylor University
President Robert B. Sloan has caught more heat over the
controversy for speaking out against the editorial. While
clearly Sloan and the editorial board had good intentions
for their actions, the religious bigotry displayed by one
Texas newspaper gives a perfect example of why Baylor has
good reason to exert control over its own publication.
The Lariat editorial, which equated the current ban on homo
sexual couples marrying to racial discrimination, was rightfully
met with reproach last week from Sloan. Sloan stated in a public
letter, “Espousing in a Baylor publication a view that is so out
of touch with traditional Christian teachings is not only unwel
come, it comes dangerously close to violating University poli
cy.” By remaining silent on the issue, Sloan would have been
condoning the erosion of Baylor’s principles. By taking a public
stand to clarify university policy and philosophy, he was pro
tecting the body of rules and beliefs that has made Baylor what
it is today. However, the student editors were not all wrong.
An editorial board and opinion section is designed to express
the personal views of the publication’s writers, editors and read
ers. The opinion section serves as a reflection of and indeed the
facilitator of public discourse. The expression of differing opin
ions, the true diversity needed in higher education, has dramatic
educational benefits. Sloan’s opposition to the editorial board
for expressing its personal opinions defeats the purpose of the
board and the opinion section itself. By the very existence of an
opinion page, writers and editors have a duty to engage the
debates of the day. The Lariat’s student editorial board did
exactly that. There is little point in having an opinion section if
writers must toe a specific line and not honestly engage in cur
rent events.
What sets the situation with The Lariat apart is that The
Lariat is a publication of the country’s largest Baptist
institution of higher education. Whereas The Battalion is
largely independently financed and operated, The Lariat
is actually owned by Baylor. If public officials, such as
the Texas A&M administration, call for the censorship
of opinions published in this paper, they are treading
dangerously close to stepping on First Amendment
rights. In Baylor’s case, private institution officials were
keeping their own publication in line. As The New York
Times reporter and former editor-in-chief of The Lariat
Edward Wyatt wrote on a journalism electronic bulletin
board, “The student editors had picked up a vital real-
world lesson: the difference between censorship and ownership.”
Ultimately, Sloan did his job as spokesman for the university.
Enter The Houston Chronicle. Since Sloan issued his con
demnation of the Lariat editorial, The Chronicle has run a syn
dicated column and its own editorial personally attacking Sloan
and the Christian beliefs that Baylor is built upon. The column
referred to Sloan, a Baylor alumnus and holder of a Doctorate
of Theology, as “Bubba” and claimed that “deep Baptist Texas”
does not have “American mainstream and 21st century think
ing.” The column also referred to Baylor as a “Bible-toting,
baby-sitter school.” It finishes by joking about Baptists and
sexual positions. The Chronicle’s editorial claimed that Baylor
could not become a great institution if “all university endeavors
must be aligned with biblical precepts” and called for Sloan’s
resignation.
The Chronicle, which lacks any resemblance to a fair and
balanced editorial board, has no room to speak when it comes to
using a single mindset to dictate editorial policy. The
Chronicle’s actions speak louder than words in the debate of
whether or not Baylor should regulate the anti-Christian content
of its paper. The Chronicle could learn a lot about tolerance
from a Baylor education.
Matthew Maddox is a senior
management major.
MATTHEW
MADDOX