Dally fkbrciken
Friday, January 20, IC34
O ri
; 1 1
Prj3 4.
Sen. Karen Kilgarin should do
Nebraska's educational community a
favor and abandon her plan to bring
NU under the control of the Legislature.
The Omaha senator has introduced
LR225CA which calls for making the
NU Board of Regents an appointed
body as well as bringing it under legis
lative authority.
As if that is not enough, then Sen.
tor Vard Johnson of Omaha has a
second proposal LR238 would also
eliminate the NU Board of Regents and
the State College Board of Trustees,
and place NU and the state's public
colleges under absolute legislative con
trol. Kilgarin's first proposal is undesir
able, but Johnson's is not even realis
tic. By having control over state appro
priations, the Legislature already has
plenty of say in how NU operates. To
think that it could be in charge of the
daily operation of the university is
frightening.
Kilgarin argues that the Legislature
should oversee NU because the sena
tors are "obviously closer to the peo
ple" than the regents.
But considering its record, one has
to question how in touch the Legisla
ture is with the people it serves.
The voters have repeatedly turned
down amendments which would raise
legislative salaries from their current
$400 per month. That seems to be one
good reflection of how most Nebras
kans view their senators.
More importantly, the Legislature's
record clearly has been one of ineffec
tiveness. This is the same elected body,
for example, that spent several days
debating what logo to put on Nebras
ka's new license plates . . . and came
up with nothing.
While the new license plate logo isn't
one of the great issues facing Nebraska,
it is an example of the indecision that
occurs at the Capitol.
It's no secret that NU is not one of
the great educational institutions of
the world. But considering the re
sources available, it seems fair to say
that the quality of education at the
three NU campuses is at least average.
No one has really offered any evi
dence that legislative control would
improve the quality of education. Until
such evidence is offered, the system
should remain as it is and the Legisla
ture should get on with the business of
running state government
2-
CIVIL
r 1 t Jtr
6
(
i
..jSr4
4 I
: f 1 11 i'i
)
Hi V
s ' 1 1 11 1 I
FOP TUS (zZZO 7 Till t.3TD
Obsession with victory
Student input encouraged
during budget reallocation
Hard times may indeed be getting
tougher at UNL as Chris Welsch
stated in his editorial (Daily Nebra
skan, Jan. 1 6but they may not be.i.
feel it is very important for students
Guest
Opinion
to realize exactly what the realloca-tion-reduction
process means to
them.
Chris said: "The cuts mean reduc
tions in staff, probably will cause
larger classes and may mean some
students will have t6 postpone tak
ing some courses."
Actually the "cuts" are reductions
which were made internally here at
UNL for the purpose of improving
the overall quality of the institution.
All money which is taken out of a
budget during the reduction-real-location
process will be put back
into a high-priority area. So the
actual effect is that there will prob
ably be smaller classes, and stu
dents now postponing classes may
be able to get into additional sec
tions with funds freed by the realla
cation process.
Additionally, there is no basis for
the comment that "When professors
quit, the classes they taught proba
bly will be combined with others.
Students will be paying more for
less." Although some lines will re
main vacant, as instructors retire
additional personnel will be hired in
high-priority areas, as well as just
replacing the lost faculty members.
Student input is still needed. ASUN
held an open forum for students,
and the Academic Planning Com
mittee received student testimony;
but there is one more step. If you
disagree with any of the proposed
reductions, contact Regents Chair
man Ed Schwartzkopf in Lincoln,
student Regent Matt Wallace in the
ASUN office, or plan on attending
the open hearing by the regents in
February. As an individual, you can
have influence. Together we can
make a difference.
Kevin Goldstein
junior
business
Editor's Note: Goldstein was the
etc&ent representative on the Aca
demic Planning Committee. He
clso is a former ASUN senator.
makes us fear failure
Success has been dead-bolted into
our heads. From the "coffee achiever"
faces flashed our optical nerves during
prime-time viewing to "dress for suc
cess" workshops taking place through-
f7? Kema
I v. bl
out the country, the message is locked
in. Whatever the game, winning is the
key and everyone has a magic solution
for doing it.
Along with our obsession with win
ning, we Americans carry a fear of los
ing. Someone once told me that win
ning isn't everything, but losing is noth
ing. Though I'm sure they were joking,
the words ring true. We can success
fully deal with winning, but we find it
difficult to be successful losers.
Nobody wants to find their name in
the roster of The world 's most success
ful losers. Because of this, some people
blame others for their failure, find out
side reasons for their failure or avoid
situations that can result in failure.
I'm sure most of us have blamed our
friend or even invented a friend rather
than face mom's wrath about a broken
vase. Some of us may have even feigned
injury to cover our mistake. Although I
wouldn't say these are healthy ways of
dealing with losing, I think avoiding
high risk situations is worse. This is
failure phobia at its peak
How many students have registered
for a class, attended long enough to
read the syllabus and dropped be
cause they were afraid to bomb the
course?
How many times do we not voice our
opinion because we're afraid of being
in the minority or avoid facing prob
lems that may have a negative effect
on us?
All of us have insecurities and are
afraid that somehow we just wont
measure up. But to stifle those insecur
ities or vulnerabilities is to deny a part
of who we are. Avoiding possible pain
ful situations is a cop out on who we
can be.
' Conquering the rear or losing is "eas
ier said than done," however. The pho
bia is a pre-Darwinistic thread in our
society. Some people, though, haven't
been bothered by this fear in their
strafe to win.
Mark Twain describes such a person
and addresses failure phobia in his
autobiography. Twain writes about a
relative who favored land investments:
" There's millions in it millions!' It
is true that he always said that about
everything and was always mis
taken too, but this time he was right;
which shows that a man who goes
around with a prophecy-gun ought
never to get discouraged. If he will
keep up his heart and fire at every
thing he sees he is bound to hit some
thing by and by."
Media under Reagan finds it's a do's life
Although Ronald Reagan almost certainly, and
probably sincerely, would say that he has been badly
.treated by the press (for example, necessitating
James Watt's resignation for bigotry and insolence)
f
j-
Eric
Peterson
a strong case can be made that the Reagan adminis
tration has handled the news media like it was his
trained dog.
American soldiers remain in Lebanon for reasons
no one has even brought forward, let alone justified;
the TV commentators point this out infrequently,
and in the mildest tones. The news media treats the
administration's abstract and oppressive rationale
for its Central American policies as given and
assumed truth.
After the press blackout of the Grenada invasion
the first in American history the outcry over
censorship was muted. Newsweek castigated a pho
tographer for not following theTules the Army laid
'i3
out for press coverage, and published an appalling
article on the invasion in its Nov. 7 issue, which
lauded Reagan for asserting his power as sort of a
way of making up for the sabotage bombing in Bei
rut two days earlier. "It was a week of tragedy and
triumph," Newsweek intoned.
Whatever lies the administration dished out, the
main body of reporters lapped up like happy pups.
It turned out that the "appeal" of five Caribbean
countries for U.S. intervention was made only at
American request; lhat American medical students
were endangered not by the recent coup in Grenada
but by the invasion itself; that the dreaded airstrip
extension which the Cubans were building was a
commercial project approved by the World Bank
and not a military stab in America's back; that
reports of huge Cuban contingents and mass graves
and ammunitions stores were simply lies and quite
literal fabrications of the State Department.
George Will, whose conservatism has become
extreme since the last presidential election, and
since he has had Reagan and his wife twice to
dinner, wrote in the celebratory Nov. 7 Newsweek
that "VS. soldiers' bootprints on Grenada's soil h ave
done more than the MX will do to make U.S. power
credible and peace secure." What followed was a
predictable justification of big sticks and shouted
threats, but it was surprising and distressing to see
Will acquiesce in the press blackout, asserting that
"journalists have earned a certain coolness from
officials making life-and-death decisions."
In fact, Will finds any war coverage likely to lead to
sissy pacifism. "It shapes, and I suspect is sometimes
intentionally used to shape, the political climate: it
promotes national flinching," he said.
One of the worst things of a war-mongering
atmosphere is how it dubs the intelligence and
coarsens the sensibilities of people like Will, people
who should know better.
The supine American press has not only allowed
but furthered the impression that the Grenada
shootout was Reagan's big victory. That is certainly
how Reagan himself views what he called a "rescue
mission;" at a speech for Medal of Honor recipients,
Reagan affected a buHy boy swagger.
"Our days of weakness are over," he said. "Our
military forces are back on their feet and standing
tall."
Where next?
