The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, March 11, 1971, Image 4

Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page. It is also available as plain text as well as XML.

    Mankiewicz and Braden
Masters Week is over with, but a few words need
to be said about the program.
This year's Masters Week was one of the best
events this University has ever sponsored. The
returning alumni represented a diverse, yet dynamic
group of individuals.
And the Masters were generous in spending their
time with students in many classes and living units.
In addition to the Innocents and the Mortar
Boards, perhaps some type of special appreciation
should be expressed to Union Program Director Hal
Smith and President Joseph Soshnik for their help in
making the program a success and for making the
event one in which many students had an
opportunity to participate.
But despite the success of the program, there is
already talk that the program may be underfunded or
perhaps discontinued next year.
The prospect of discontinuation of the Masters
Week program is disheartening. It is unfortunate that
we face this type of attack at such a critical time, a
time when there is' such an acute need of having
universities become more responsive to community
needs. This possibility is also serious in that it may be
discouraging further constructive action by men's and
women's honoraries. If anything, the relatively recent
phenomenon of having honorary societies perform
meaningful functions should be embraced, not
banished. If this is the upshot of Governor Exon's
budget-that meaningful and relevant programs will be
cut- then there can be no question on the effects of
the new University budget. It's going to mean the
students will be paying more and receiving less.
William F. Buckley Jr.
ng II
Having scaled down the
brokerage function of the
federal government by relieving
it of the responsibility for
taking money from the richer
states in order to return money
to the richer states, what can it
usefully do? Two things, one
of which I alluded to in the
first of this two-part series.
Namely, to act as the agent
through which money passes
hands from the richer to the
poorer states, as the
philanthropic or
redistributionist impulse moves
the Congress.
Possible formula
A suggested formula might
be based on the distance of any
given state from the national
median. Thus, for instance,
Mississippi, where per capita
income is $2,218, presumably
needs more help than Montana,
where per capita income is
$3,130, close to the national
median of $3,406. Congress
might reasonably decide to
funnel $100 per capita to the
poorer states, and take it from
The second thing the federal
government could usefully do
is to lease its tax-gathering
facilities to the individual
states. I do not see any
substantial argument, based in
theory or in practice, against
such cooperation. Thus, on day
X in the future, the resident of
New York, having filled out his
federal tax return, would go on
to consult the table for New
York; which would give him
the exact sum of money he
would need to add to his
federal return in order to
discharge his state obligation.
Exit, with the single deed, all
the state internal revenue
agencies that occupy
themselves with income taxes.
The federal government, on
receipt of the grand total,
would put aside the indicated
sum for the credit of the
individual state, less a service
Now ideally, the federal
government would get out of
the business of graduating the
tax. As Professor Friedman has
demonstrated, it could do so
with no pain at all to itself, and
with great benefit to the
body politic.
Reforms needed
A very few reforms would
be needed. Those Mr.
Friedman has advocated are: 1 )
eliminate all deductions, 2)
double dependency allowances;
and lo, you could raise as much
money as the government now
raises from personal income
taxes, by having a set rate of
20 per cent. You could even
throw in a $1500 negative
income tax floor, by increasing
the flat rate to only 23. The
figures are suggestive of how
relatively little is the money
that is taken from the rich.
They are simply not numerous
enough to constitute a
significant tax factor.
The states could then devise
income taxes of their own
choosing, setting the rates
according to their fancy: and,
dutifully, the tax would be
collected by the single internal
revenue agent, and remitted to
the states. But the taxpayer
would always be aware who it
is that is taking his money.
That nexus, so greatly stressed
by Wilbur Mills, is
indispensable to enlightened
self-government. Under Mr.
Nixon's plan, the Congress of
the United States ordains the
tax, then remits a part of it to
the state, whose legislators
then assemble in order to
discuss merely the matter of
how the money should be
spent: not whether it should
have been raised in the first
To separate the one
function from the other is the
device of those who wish to
conceal from the taxpayer
what are the economic
realities. In his book The
Affluent Society, Professor
Galbraith, always on the prowl
for means of substituting
himself for the marketplace,
suggested automatic increases,
pegged to inflation and cost of
living, for schools, and such, to
spare the legislators the
occasional agony of having to
levy more taxes, or letting the
schools run down.
Better the agony, I say: and
surely all taxpayers would say
as much, and would hope that
Congress will address this
opportunity to engage in
revenue-sharing, by adopting
genuine, radical, reform.
Sen. George McGovern also should be applauded
for having the guts to confront FBI director J. Edgar
M cGovern was recently attacked as ' being
Un-American for publicizing a letter written him
anonymously by ten FBI agents.
The letter strongly attacked the dictatorial policies
of Hoover. And subsequently McGovern asked for a
congressional investigation of Hoover's
Hoover maligned McGovern for publicizing the
letter, saying the action was "reprehensible" and
However, in defense of McGovern's actions, it
should be reiterated that if Hoover wasn't doing
anything wrong he should have no fears of justifying
the administration of the FBI in front of a Senate
investigating committee.
The concerted attacks on McGovern by FBI
officials, calling the senator Un-American and the rest
should indicate that something is rotten in Hoover's
state of Denmark.
The problem is that McGovern doesn't stand
much of a chance in getting a congressional
investigation of the FBI.
In fact, there will never be an investigation of the
FBI until the people demand it, until the voters
realize that in a democracy the government, hence
the police, are supposed to be servants and not the
tyrants of the state.
Exon's Edsel
The following is an
editorial exerpt from the
Omaha World Herald, Tues.,
March 9, concerning the
University budget.
"The governor used an
automotive analogy which
probably was not his most
fortunate choice as a figure of
'Isn't it possible for us,' he
said, 'to accomplish our goals
by traveling the road to
excellence in higher education
in a Ford station wagon with
more room for all than in a
luxurious Cadillac complete
with stereo music?'
We doubt that the
university or its supporters are
expecting a Cadillac. And we
hope the budget doesn't turn
out to justify a description as
Exon's Edsel, a lemon of the
vehicle that would take the
university chugging down the
road to educational
CONNIE WINKLER, managing editor
JOHN DVORAK, news editor
GENE HILLMAN, advertising manager
JAMES HORNER, chairman, publications committee
Staff writers: Gary Seecrest, Bill Smitherman, Jim
Pidntwi, Steve Stressor, Dave Brink, Marsha Bangert, Carol
Goetschiut, Charlie Harptter. Mike Wilkins, Jim Carver,
Marsha Kahm, Bart Becker, Dennis Snyder, Vicki Pulos,'
Roxanne Rogers, Ann Pedersen. East campus editor: Marlene
Timmerman, Sports editor: Jim Johnston. Sports writers:
Steve Kadel, Warren Obr. Photographers: Mike Hayman, Gail
Folda. Entertainment editor: Larry Kubert. Literary editor:
Alan Boye, Artists, Linda Lake, Greg Scott. Design editor:
Jim Gray. Copy editors: Tom Lansworth, Laura Winers. Don
Russell. Night news editor: Leo Schleicher .Night news ass't:
Rodney Wortmann.
Coordinator: Sandra Carter, Salesmen: Steve Yates, Jane
Kid well, Greg Scott. Ray Pyle, Bill Cooley. Business
assistant: Pam Baker. Distribution manager: Barry Pilger,
John Waggoner, John Ingwerson.
Telephones: editor: 472-2588, news:2589 , advertising:
2590. Second class postage rates paid at Lincoln, Nebr.
Subscription rates are $5 per semester or $8.50 per year.
Published Monday through Friday during the school year
except during vacation and exam periods. Member of the
Intercollegiate Press, National Educational Advertising
The Daily Nebraskan is a student publication, independent
of the University of Nebraska's administration, faculty and
student government.
Address: The Daily Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union,
University of Nebraska, Lincoln, Nebraska 68508.
The Pentagon counterattacks
is giving away, my right is
pushed back. ..I am attacking."
The words were those of
Marshal Foch, at the Second
Battle of the Marne, but they
could have been spoken last
week by Secretary of Defense
Melvin Laird, as the Pentagon
Bad Week
All week, it had been little
short of disaster. In Laos, the
South Vietnamese, "hacking
it"-- in General Abrams'
immortal phrase-on their own,
with nothing to help them but
2,000 U.S. air missions a day in
a battle area smaller than most
American cities, were being
badly mauled except when
U.S. helicopters could pick
them up and move them ahead.
Midweek, CBS moved in
with a documentary, "The
Selling of the Pentagon,"
demonstrating the millions
spent by the American people
to convince themselves to
spend more. Pentagon
apologists like Rep. F. Edward
Hebert (D-La.) was reduced to
sputtering rage.
Next day, it turned out, a
large piece of pipe displayed
earlier as having been severed
from the Ho Chi Minh pipeline
by the South Vietnamese,
hacking it on their own in
Laos, had been picked up
somewhere else at some other
time-no one was quite sure.
On top of all that, the My
Lai court-martial of Lt. Calley
ground on, amid mounting
desire to hear from
higher-ranking officers who
covered up the horror, and
Sen. Ribicoffs subcommittee
was unfolding a comic opera of
corruption among American
brass in Saigon.
Into the breach on Sunday
afternoon stepped Sen. Henry
Jackson of Washington, the
Pentagon's Old Reliable, with
the revelation that the Soviet
Union was starting to build a
missile even bigger and more
frightening than the SS-9.
Said Jackson, "The Russians
are now in the process of
deploying a new generation, an
advanced generation, of
offensive systems.. .the new
developments are ominous
Lo and behold, immediately
i following Sen. Jackson's
revelation, the Pentagon
backed him up. Their
intelligence is apparently
It was a double newsbreak,
and it is hard to tell which is
more important-the news that
the Russians are advancing in
their missile construction or
that the Pentagon intends to
use Sen. Jackson as its
principal mouthpiece in the
forthcoming presidential
Neither is unexpected. The
United States is installing
Minuteman III, a-multi-warhead
version of
Minuteman II. We are also
installing Poseidon, a
multi-warhead version of
Polaris, but with three times
the payload. It is hardly
surprising to learn that the
Russians are advancing, too.
As for Sen. Jackson, his
ability to make Pentagon
revelations is an indication that
his candidacy is a serious one.
There is not much chance that
he can win the primaries he
thinks essential to nomination,
but his candidacy may force
front-runner Muskie into a
strong stance for national
defense. Muskie has twice
voted against the ABM and has
declared himself in favor of the
McGovern-Hatfield proposal to
set a terminal date for U.S.
troops in Indochina. He may
now try to find a strong
pro-Pentagon issue with which
to coun ter Jackson.
What the Jackson revelation
ought to bring about is a
re-examination of the U.S.
position at the SALT talks,
where we are asking the
Russians to agree that they will
halt the building of their SS-9s
and equivalents in return for a
promise on our part to cease
deployment of ABM. The
Russians cannot possibly buy
such an arrangement, which
leaves us free to develop
offensive weapons while they
are not.
But President Nixon has
already put himself on record
as opposing the Soviet
countersuggestion, which is
that each side cease the
building of ABM. So the arms
race will continue and Sen.
Jackson, the conduit for
Pentagon leaks, will justify it
for us as we go.
dear editor. . . dear editor. . . dear editor
To clarify
Dear Editor.
This is in reference to our
letter that was published March
8th with a reply from
Governor James J.. Exon. As a
member of the academic
community of the University
of Nebraska, we feel that our
intelligence was insulted.
Although the figures stated in
Governor Exon's letter may be
accurate, they are very
misleading. As an example,
there was a large percentage of
increase when the University of
Nebraska at Omaha was added
to the budget. Also the fact of
the continuing increase of new
students each year on both
campuses was not mentioned.
There has been :ricreased
interest in our concern about
the budget proposal from
various sources on campus. In a
recent meeting with
Vice-Chancelor G. Robert Ross
and Dick Fleming from Public
Relations Office, favorable
comment was given to our
organization for our concern
with this issue.
Due to the way the facts
were presented in Governor
Exon's letter, we feel that a
very untrue and misleading
image of the University of
Nebraska was given. We are
therefore following up with a
letter presenting the facts as we
feel they should be presented.
Yours Truly,
Dan L. Cuda, President
Student Veterans Organization
University of Nebraska
More on the budget
Dear editor,
The following is a copy of
the letter I sent to Governor
Exon concerning the budget.
Dear Governor Exon,
In the past tew weeks of
controversy over the proposed
University budget, you have
continually. referred to
University officials as
responding to your proposals
with "temper tantrums" and
have further alienated them by
stating that "Nebraskans and
students of the University of
Nebraska have been misled by
information fed to news
sources by handsomely paid
employees of the University..."
Misleading remarks are
plainly evident from your
position also. First, from your
letter to the Student Veterans
Organization, the merge with
UNO and its effects were
handily left out. Also no
figures were included to show
the percentage of increase of
state aid as compared to the
percentage increase in
enrollment. The inclusion of
these two figures would have
done much to clarify your
position. Second, in relation to
your speech in Columbus in
relating to the fact that 10 of
the University's classes being
offered have four or less
enrolled, this is clearly
misleading to the outside
observer who has no
conception of the fact that this
ten percent of the classes
offered actually effect
probably less than one percent
of those enrolled at the
University, which was not
brought forward in your
speech. If the University
professors were not fearful of
the consequences, I believe
that could sight many
examples to the contrary. All
that has really been proven is
that anyone can manipulate
figures to accrue to their own
These kind of responses are
reminisent of purely political
speeches used primarily to
degrade or default an
opponent. Surely, these cannot
be your intentions, can they?
(Or have you not time to start
working towards what should
be a common goal, instead of
traveling around the state
defaming prominent appointed
and elected officials.
No truer words were ever
spoken when Chancellor
Varner stated that there was a
lack of understanding involved.
This is evident from your
speeches and your letter to the
Student Veteran Organization.
Meaningful, discussion of all
the facts involved would surely
benefit all affected.
Jack Ford
Correction in tuition
Dear editor.
Though the budget outlook
for the University may appear
bleak to many students, it is
not quite as bleak as the
proposed student letter run in
Wednesday's Daily Nebraskan
makes it appear. In J he
Governor's budget a $38.50
increase per semester or $77
increase per year is
recommended for those
students carrying 12-16 hours,
not a $70 increase per semester
as stated.
Mrs. Mary Lynn James
Adminstrative Intern
i we could to confirm these
speakers. The facts are that all
but one had never been
contacted by ASG. They never
"backed out", they were never
"in". (It should be noted that
ASUN is not a member of the
ASG). At that point, with little
time left, we of the ASUN
Teach-in Committee, did
everything possible to go ahead
as planned. The fault lies not in
ASUN but in ASG, who, at the
last minute, broke their
Ron Alexander
Tim Kincaid
Bill Tiwald
ASUN Teach-in Committee
Replies to Courier
Dear editor,
A reply to Mr. Egger's
comments in the CUE courier
No. 2, March 8 (ASUN
Anxieties or How to Blow it
Again) is necessary. Mr. Egger
stated that ASUN entrusted
IPA to provide "conflicting
viewpoints about the War" for
the ASUN Teach-in that was
later cancelled. What he didn't
mention was that we contacted
members of various groups on
campus and asked them to help
us procure "conservative"
spokesmen. We also contacted
Republican National Chairman
and Senator from Kansas,
Robert Dole and the entire
Nebraska Congressional
Delegation asking them to
appear. Thone and McCollister
agreed to reply on tape to
prepared questions which
would be played back at the
Teach-in. The Pentagon was
also asked to provide a speaker
on the ecology of Vietnam.
Mr. Egger also stated that
Schliesinger, Lowenstein, and
Haiberstam "backed out", and
blamed that on ASUN. The
facts are that we were relying
upon the Association of
Student Governments in
Washington D.C. who had
given their word that the three
speakers were coming. After
pressing ASG for specific
details, they admitted that
these speakers were not
confirmed. We did everything
Legislature politics
This letter is being written
to all those who are truly
interested in the proposed
University budget, and the
success or failure Governor
Exon attains in accomplishing
The Budget Committee of
the Legislature will discuss this
segment of the proposed
state-wide budget Thursday,
March 11, at 2:00 P.M.
For anyone planning on
attending this committee
hearing, I would like to make
one recommendation. If you
go, and plan to testify in front
of the committee in the behalf
of the University, take solid
evidence with you. Have facts
with you that you can present
for your cases. Do not, as so
many people meaninglessly do
in letters, attempt to gain
sympathy by saying, for
example, "How can they do
this to a fine school?" or, "It's
a number one school; let's be
sure to keep it that way."
These statements won't
work--you must be very
concrete and present facts and
figures that will convince the
lawmakers that we, the
members of the University
community are right, and that
perhaps our Governor might be
Richard K. Sophir