Newspaper Page Text
Page 5
Clark Atlanta University Panther
April 29, 1991
Op-Ed
A "C" Queen For An "A+" University
By PAULETTE V. WALKER
Editor-in-Chief
Clark Atlanta University. An institution thriving
in the largest consortium of African American
centers of higher learning in the world. CAU boasts
that it's above average, constantly striving for
excellence. A school with a A+ average. One
Exceptional University. It's only befitting that such
an institution be represented and led by students
who exemplify these "A+" ideals.
CAU recently held elections for various
leadership positions on campus. I enjoyed this
campaign, because I noted that many qualified
candidates were running. By "qualified" I mean
students who are well-rounded with a history of
community service and a respect for high scholastic
achievement.
I am generally pleased with the outcome of the
elections. Pamela Malone, the victor in the Graduate
SGA race has a long history of "progressive
programming." She has instituted several programs
during her time here, geared toward uplifting African
Americans and providing role models for children.
Her tenure is promising, but she has a bit of
housecleaning to do in light of the "secret
resignation of last year's Graduate SGA President,
Mary Lacy. Ramona Houston, a young lady who has
been making strides in closing the gap between
students and the surrounding community since she
set foot on campus is to be applauded for her victory
as well.
Perhaps the most controversial race this year had
to be for the crown of Miss CAU. Five young ladies
— Earnelle Pritchett, Joyce Mitchell, Benita
Kimball, Wanda Nesbitt and Ravena Baskerville -
vied for the chance to represent CAU locally and
nationally in pageants, conferences and in other
official capacities. Historically, if sporadically,
CAU has enjoyed queens who not only were
talented, personable and articulate, but also had a
long list of solid academic achievements with grade
point averages to match.
Miss CAU 1990-91 is a perfect example; an
accounting major, this young lady juggled an active
record of community service, maintained an
excellent rapport with the student body and the
administration and will be graduating with a
cumulative GPA of approximately 3.7. When she
represented CAU in the United Negro College Fund
conference and the National Black Collegiate
Pageant, people were wowed with her intellect as
well as her talent and personality. Miss Wilhite
explained to me that some pageants she competed in
required that she have at least a 3.0 grade point
average.
Unfortunately, it seems the student elections
committee (SEC) doesn't share Miss Wilhite's
adherence to excellence.
By most measures, our 1991-92 Miss CAU is
quite a young lady. Many students are fond of her
pleasing personality and winning ways. But there
are others who are uncomfortable with academic
standing. Our new Miss CAU is a psychology
major. She entered CAU in the fall of 1988. By most
computations, this should place her currently as a
"rising senior," but reports have shown that she
has only accumulated enough hours to be presently
classified as a sophomore. Strike one.
When candidates were rushing to fulfill the
requirements to run for office, many were dismayed
and upset when they found the SEC had extended the
deadline for applications. No one knew why, but it
was rumored that the SEC made this move in order to
allow this young lady to get her materials in. Strike
two.
Further investigations have shown that this
likeable young lady has a 2.5 GPA. Strike three.
Now, this average is not BAD and it does meet the
requirements according to the recently revised
student handbook. But shouldn't students who are
selected to represent this exceptional university
have "better-than-average" credentials?
For the fall 1990 semester, approximately 600
CAU students were listed on the Dean's List. Most of
the victors in the recent elections fell into this
category. Unfortunately, we can't say the same for
our queen.
I knew of her academic "credentials" when debates
were held a couple of weeks ago. I raised my hand to
ask the candidates how important academic averages
were to the role of Miss CAU; unfortunately, my
hand was "mysteriously" overlooked and so was my
question. So I now ask, "Just how important is
academics at this institution of higher learning?"
I raised this question to some students. Issac
Washington, former SGA vice president said, "Is
this the best we could come up with?" he asked. "I
thought we were growing as a institution; we no
longer need a pretty girl as our queen or 'Miss
Popular.' There are enough beautiful sisters with
brains to match; sisters who exceed the minimum
requirements.
Mr. Washington explained that during his tenure
as SGA vice president, members of that
administration called for an increase in the
minimum requirements which included an increase in
the minimum GPA. Their efforts were squashed
because "...too many average people wanted to
maintain the status quo.”
President Thomas W. Cole, Jr., a man well-
known for his respect and admiration of academic
achievement, was recently quoted in an article
(printed in this issue) about honor students. He said
that he was proud of the students because they gave
him a chance to brag. Will he be able to brag about
our queen during the upcoming school year?
This is not an attack on our queen. This is not an
attack on those who put her in office, how were they
to know of her academic standing? But I do question
the ethics of the SEC; this governing body that has
caused so much controversy.
I'm afraid that Miss Nesbitt's victory brings to
question the legitimacy of Miss CAU as a viable
political figure all together. It places her role back
in the status of pageantry and popularity contests.
I will be leaving my beloved "...school on the
hill," in a couple of weeks, but I look forward to the
day when I can come back to one exceptional
university ... not one AVERAGE university. This
won't happen if we continue to allow mediocrity to
invade our halls.
Administration Sells Out
By CYDNEY WILLIAMS
Contributing Writer
Congressman Newt Gingrich
from the Sixth District was on
the campus of Clark Atlanta
University, Mar 28, 1990. You
probably didn't know this, but
don't feel bad; you're not alone.
Perhaps there was a reason for
this "lack of knowledge," but I
knew, I attended and here's the
scoop.
Dr. Charles Churchwell
(Interim Provost and Dean,
School of Library and Info
Services) was in attendance as
was Dr. Lou Beasley, Dean of the
School of Social Work; Dr
William Scott, Dean of Arts and
Sciences ... wait a minute, by the
time I name everyone who was
there along with their "sentence-
long" titles, it would take up an
entire page. Suffice it to say,
these were the big potatoes — the
in crowd. I will state for the
record, that our "head potato" Dr.
Thomas W. Cole, Jr. was also in
attendance.
A cutline in the April 1, 1991
issue of the Panther read,
"Congressman Newt Gingrich
met with Administrative officials
at dark Atlanta University
recently to discuss possible
federal grants to the university."
Should we as accept crumbs from
a Congressman whose record of
continual opposition of
minority causes remains
consistent and firm? If in fact
federal grants are available,
shouldn't we instead upgrade our
grant proposal and
administration skills to a
standard that will qualify us for
federal grants without the "help"
of this Congressman?
As I sat in this nicely
decorated room, I took in the
freshly polished wood board-
room table, CAU china cups and
laughter amongst the deans as
they kissed up to the
Congressman.
As the meeting proceeded, Dr.
Lou Beasley brought up issues to
many of the Congressman's
statements. To my surprise, an
air of ambivalence fell upon the
room.
The topic of discussion shifted
quickly to the issue of President
Bush's veto of the 1987 Civil
Rights Restoration Act. An Act
whose chief opponent for the
Republican party in the House of
Representative was good ole
Newt Gingrich.
On May 20, 1987, the Senate
Committee on Labor and Human
Resources voted to close a major
loophole in our civil rights laws.
The bill, S.557, or what is
commonly referred to as the
Civil Rights Restoration Act of
1987 (Pub. L.NO. 100-
259,1988) seeks to restore the
broad scope of civil rights
coverage that had been diluted by
the United States Supreme Court
decision in Grove City College
V. Bell, 465 U.S. 555 (1984).
This Act was designed to
clarify and promote the universal
application of the following
statutes: Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964, (42 U.S.C.
Section 2000 dO, (1964), Title
IX of the education Amendment
of 1972, Pub. L. NO. 92-318, 86
Stat. 373-75 (codified as
amended at 20 U.S.C., Section
1 68 1 -86, the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975, 29
U.S.C., (Section 623), and
section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973. It's
important to note that during
this period of time,
Congressman Gingrich was
holding on to President Ronald
Regan coat-tails as he vetoed
this legislation.
With the assistance of the
U.S. Catholic Conferences of
Bishops, American Jewish
Congress, Union of American
Hebrew Congregations, National
Rights to Life Committee, Inc.,
an unequivocal message was sent
to the then President Regan. On
March 22, 1988, Congress voted
to override President Regan's
Grove City Veto; the senate
voted 73-24, and the house voted
292-133, clearly more than the
two-thirds necessary to override
the Presidential Veto.
In light of his political
inclinations, why would CAU
invite him to this institution
rather that Senator Edward
Kennedy who introduced the Act
on February 19, 1987?
If it had not been for thise
"quotas" that the Congressman
so vehemently opposes, many
of our "hand-shaking" deans
wouldn/t have been allowed to
attend institutions of higher
learning. Even though we
witness quotas take on the
connotation of set-aside, which
we saw the only female
appointed to the United States
Supreme Court, Justice Sandra
Day O'Connor so elegantly
strike down in, City of
Richmond V. J.A. Croson CO.,-
US-,109 S. Ct. 706 (1989), we
still find it necessary to laugh
and talk with persons who have a
history perpetuating ill-will
upon our people.
It must stop and it must stop
now! The nerve of these deans or
anyone in the "administration"
to broker our futures and the
future of our prosterity to the
exclusion of dissent. And I
dissent now and forever in the
future the conduct exhibited by
those who propose to represent
us at that meeting.
I have placed before you facts
and authorities which support the
position that "Quotas" were the
trade-off for the Civil Rights Act
of 1964. Read the arguments
presented by those opposing the
Civil Rights Act of 1964. Better
yet, recall President George
Bush's reasoning for why he
vetoed the Civil Rights
Restoration Act, and wonder why
our educators would find it
necessary to discuss our future
with our chief opponent. The
time has come for us to learn
from the process of trial and error
and not keep repeating the same
mistakes.
The congressman discussed
the issue of Bush failure to pass
the Civil Rights Bill. Gingrich
made no hesitation to say the
"...we (meaning his other politic
buddies) agree on 80% of that
bill." He went on to say that
they should just pass the civil
rights bill; as for the 20% that
they didn't agree on, he said:
"Let's just have a part and discuss
it after the bill is passed.” What
the congressman failed to
mention was that that 20% is
very important.
That infamous 20% deals with
very serious issues such as quotas
for African Americans. In fact,
the United States Commission
on Civil Rights has taken a stand
to let President Bush know that
they are unhappy with the veto
of last year's civil rights bill.
Recently appointed to the U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights is
Frankie Freeman, who is the first
women ever to be appointed.
She has made public comments
that President Bush must
recognize the civil rights bill for
its full value and not recognize it
as a quota bill. The stand that
Freeman and the U.S.
Commission on Civil Rights has
taken proves that all is not
"peaches and cream" as far as the
20% of the bill that
Congressman Gingrich said
"let's just forget about."
I hope this editorial has shed
some light on how we as African
Americans have got to stop
believing everything the "good
old" politicians are telling us.
When will we ever realize the
process of trial and error is to
learn from our mistakes and not
to keep repeating them. As far as
the administration of this
university is concerned, you
guys have made significant
progress. However, incidents
such as the meeting with
Congressman Gingrich show just
how far you have to go in order
to be an administration that will
stand for something or fall for
anything.