Short changed
Give the SGA a chance to succeed

Change without caution and calculation reeks of recklessness.

Which brings us to the recent proposal to change the structure of the executive portion of the Student Government Association. The proponents of the proposal wish to eliminate the secretary position and change the names of the vice president positions in the House of Student Representatives and Programming Council to Executive Directors.

A new executive office, the SGA Vice President, would handle most of SGA’s internal affairs. This would allow the president to focus on external issues like communicating with the university’s administration, said House representative Cye Fischer, who introduced the bill at last Tuesday’s SGA meeting. If the proposal is passed by both the House and student body, candidates that run for next year’s SGA term must comply with the changes to the constitution.

Fischer’s proposal said the current structure, which was modified just last year, hasn’t allowed SGA to fulfill its entire purpose.

That all may be true. But how can anyone be so sure after just one year?

Larry Markley, director of the Student Center and House adviser, said the current structure hasn’t been given enough time to be properly assessed.

“I think it’s too early to see if it works or not,” Markley said. “They can do whatever they want, but I think they’re rushing this thing through.”

Sure they are. No other organization or major corporation changes its executive structure year after year — at least not without serious advance discussion. Could you imagine a legislator proposing structural changes to the federal government, without much debate, just in time for this year’s presidential and congressional elections?

Of course not. So why should we expect different from SGA?

Last week, after more than 12 years of study, the Food and Drug Administration approved the abortion pill RU-486, a monumental breakthrough in medicine.

The pill, which also tested positively as an aid to cancer treatments, is the newest development in favor of women and their right to choose.

With the presidential election just over a month away, it is expected the issue of abortion will be debated.
However, after Tuesday’s presidential debate between Republican nominee George W. Bush and Democratic nominee, vice president Al Gore, it is apparent that abortion will not only play a vital role in the election, it will determine who will be the next president of the United States.

If you don’t think this issue is important enough to decide the election, you should.

The next president of the United States will elect three, possibly four Supreme Court justices.

Bush and Gore both said they will appoint justices who share the same ideas and values on certain political issues as themselves. This seems natural. The problem is, if conservative Republicans take the bench, who would be likely to be appointed by Bush, America may see a reversal in the famous Roe v. Wade decision.
Gore said in Tuesday’s debate, “(Bush) trusts the government to order a woman to do what they think she ought to do. I trust women to make the decisions that affect their lives, their destinies and their bodies, and I think a woman’s right to choose ought to be protected and defended.”

It is hard to comprehend a world without Roe v. Wade. It’s a world that I have not had to live in and a world I am afraid to live in.

The implications of overturning the ruling would be endless. Not only would America suddenly lose 20 years of progress, but it would send the country into turmoil. Abortions wouldn’t end. They would simply become more dangerous and illegal.

Not only is outlawing abortion wrong; it is a slap in the face to women who have worked so hard to preserve their rights to choose.

Try imagining what the world would be like if the United States government could force people to have children. We would undoubtedly have more single-mothers, more bad parents, more kids raising kids; the list goes on and on.

It just doesn’t seem possible that this could happen and you probably think this would only happen in the worse case scenario.

You’re right. The overturning of Roe v. Wade would be the worse thing that has happened to American law in decades.

The decision should be simple. Forget about Medicare and Social Security — one man alone can do little to make these policies much greater or much worse than they currently are.

If you elect a conservative Republican with conservative constituents as justices for life, we will see America change. Allowing Bush to be the man to set this in motion is a huge mistake, my fellow Americans. Forget your party lines and think about what is at stake before you vote.

We have way too much to lose by voting for Bush.

James Zwilling is a sophomore news-editorial journalism major from Phoenix, Ariz.
He can be reached at (james_zwilling@usa.net).

I am a southern white female and darn proud of it. That does not mean I have a Confederate flag on my rear windshield or that I subscribe to the Ku Klux Klan weekly. It simply means that I, as should every other person in the world, take pride in my heritage.

I read a column on Thursday entitled “Black pride stems from continued lack of color in the world” that I have to admit made me angry. While I understand the message that tried to be sent, I do not believe it was handled correctly. In fact, I read quite a few comments in that column that I consider completely asinine.

For instance, I am aware the majority of slave owners were white. I don’t appreciate the insinuation that I am ignorant of my country’s history, because the whole truth is not told in the textbooks I was given for 12 years. And the assumption that because I am white, my ancestors probably contributed to the enslavement of black people is one of the most obtuse remarks I have heard since I was unfortunate enough to watch the KKK on the evening news. I don’t know if you missed it, but there was a whole movement — to which white people contributed — that opposed slavery. It was called abolition. Look it up.

And just in case you haven’t noticed, one of the first people to bring attention to the evils of slavery, in a book called “Uncle Tom’s Cabin,” was — oh my gosh — a white woman.

Now I have to be honest. I don’t think so much emphasis should be placed on black pride month. READ THE NEXT SENTENCE. I think importance should be put on a black pride decade, or even a black pride millennium, but I don’t think the celebration of an entire race should be relegated to one month out of the year. I think there should be black pride parades in the middle of March or on the third Saturday of every month. It doesn't matter when, because we should always celebrate our heritage.

I truly believe that every day of your life should be spent in celebration of who you are and where you come from. Why should black pride be restricted to one month or one channel? Why does there need to be a separate pageant when it only seems to send the message that black women actually can’t hack it against white women?

And when we mention black people who have made a significant impact on our culture, why restrict it to actors and beauty queens? Why not mention Benjamin Bannaker, Charlotta Bass or Sojourner Truth, to name a few?

Yes, I do believe there is still a lot of discrimination in the world. Unfortunately, I don’t see that ending any time soon. But shows like “Living Single” or “The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air” aren’t going to help either. I don’t see what hearing Will Smith call yuppie white boys “cornflake” does for black pride. Don’t get me wrong, I’m a fan, and I’ve never been fascinated by “Friends” either. However, I feel the solution is to have more racially integrated shows instead of setting up casts where all of the primary characters belong to one race.

And while Dr. Martin Luther King’s words are just as true now as they were on Aug. 28, 1963, and while I believe everyone should celebrate their heritage, I don’t believe setting up a forum geared only toward black people is the way to accomplish his dream. For even Dr. King recognized on that day that many white people, as evidenced by their presence on that occasion, had “come to realize that their destiny is tied up with our destiny and their freedom is inextricably bound to our freedom. We cannot walk alone.”

Laura McFarland is a freshman news-editorial journalism major from Houston.
She can be reached at (l.d.mcfarland@student.tcu.edu).