The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current, March 02, 1973, Page PAGE 4, Image 4

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

    fiHihnrinl aM6wfij
1 i
I i
Fees compromise
If you can't beat them, join them. That
appears to be the philosophy adopted by
some University administrators and legislative
lobbyists in relation to the student fees bill
currently being considered by the
Unicameral's Education Committee.
State Sen. James Dickinson of Millard
introduced LB362 earlier in the legislative
session. The measure would end the collection
of mandatory , student fees at state colleges
and universitites in Nebraska. Many observers
believe that when the bill is reported out of
committee to the floor of the Legislature it
will have a very favorable chance of being
passed into law by the senators.
' If the legislators do indeed vote in favor of
LB362, their action would effectively
terminate all fees supported programs and
institutions on the UNL campus, with the
exception of the retirement of bonds issued
to finance dormitory construction. The
University Health Center, the Nebraska
Union, ASUN, the Recreation and
Intramurals Department and the Daily
Nsbraskan would all be forced to find some
means of support other than fees or end their
Predictably and justifiably, University
officials are upset about the imminence of
these possibilities. University lobbying efforts
thus far have been less successful than both
students and administrators had hoped. So
now University officials are described as
"trying to reach some compromises" on the
student fees issue.
Meanwhile, Sen. George Syas of Omaha has
singled out campus speakers as the one
program that he definitely want eliminated
from the student fees schedule. He says he
will introduce an amendment Jo this effect
when the Legislature considm LB362. Syas
claims he's not interested in the politics of
past or future campus speakers, but only that
he's concerned about the fact that
disinterested students must pay for speakers
they don't want to hear.
Various sources now are saying that
University officials may be willing to go along
with the Syas amendment. Evidently
administrators are willing to compromise
away student fees support for the campus
speakers program in an effort to defend the
rest of the fees programming against this
latest legislative attack.
Such a move by the University may be
politically wise, but is also somewhat morally
questionable. Following the controversial
campus conferences last year, a small but
vocal group of students and others have
worked to persuade state senators that the
speakers program is unbalanced at UNL and
that a majority of students are not interested
in the speakers no matter what their politics.
In spite of the persuasiveness of this small
group, as indicated by the existence of
LB362, both of the points cited above are
debatable. Anyone who examines the record
will find that UNL's speakers program has
been both politically balanced and as well
attended as a speech in any other Nebraska
community of 20,000 persons.
If the University accepts the Syas
amendment, it is admitting that the senator
(or the whole Legislature) is a better
distributor or administrator of student money
than are students themselves. Ultimately, it
must be recognized that the assumption that
the Legislature has the right to dictate the use
of student fees is ethically and philosophically
unsound. Fees payments are not synonymous
with public taxes. They are money paid for
the support of student services, and the
Legislature's continuing involvement in this
matter is improper.
Finally, if the University compromises
away the campus speakers program, it is also
compromising away some of the spirit of the
First Amendment's guarantee of free
expression. And such an action is
incompatible with the professed concerns and
goals of an academic community.
Tom Lansworth
. nOfti A
a t un w n i
row aw.MvtiUM .v.-1 -'1 ... . - - - - ' .. .
Tuft this simple, essy&luijon em
charge ytv rvm a Ki-iwlRrro,a
crazed drvff-addict, oTltfW-'pexrt
Jrjj'ncrHy- nuro dvmll&c to a rfch Bad
Successful tsurinesswwjnf V-if
have P0WIR! AUTHo&n Vf a SI&VThVfft
nii xms-j-er no wot rcif IrlAfilNE f No
ridiculous vcrries atwul Bills Aiimcwur
or High Inf lal ionsry Prfces j Have
-1- m A ik - a
q um i
3 3
Let them
and meat
m 1
The admirable theme of President Nixon's administration
was to get the Federal Government "off the backs of the
people," as he put it, and let them solve their own problems.
Exactly how he hoped to achieve this noble goal did not
become clear until February of 1973. With meat prices soaring
and housewives up in arms, it was Federal Reserve Board
Chairman Arthur Burns who pointed the way.
If people had a problem buying meat (even on a lay-away
plan), he said, they could solve their problem themselves by
simply not eating the stuff-at least one day a week,
"The American public," he said, "would be just as well of if
it spent less on meat and more on cheese."
The wisdom of Burns' modest '.oposal was immediately
apparent. Millions of patriotic Americans jubilantly gave up
eating meat one day a week. In fact, some of the poor were so
patriotic they hadn't eaten any in years.
Naturally, solving their own problem in this fashion quickly
instilled in Americans a new sense of self-reliance and a
capacity for sacrifice-qualities Nixon held dear. He was so
pleased, he appointed Burns Director of the Federal Bureau of
Problem Solving.
The first problem Director Burns turned his attention to
was the high cost of medical care. "This certainly isn't the
Government's problem," he said. "It's the problem of those
who get sick,
"The answer, then, is simple: don't get sick."
"By golly!" cried millions of Americans worried about the
$105-a day cost of a hospital bed. "Why didn't we think of
Overnight, Americans were not only more self-reliant, but
healthier, too. And once the pattern had been established,
solutions tumbled daily from the Federal Bureau of Problem
On Director Burns' advice,, the President impounded not
merely half the funds to clean up the nation's lakes and rivers,
but all the funds. "Don't," said Director Burns, smiling
confidently, "go near the water,"
Poverty, that age-old scourge of mankind, proved equally
soluble. "We will have no more poverty the moment people
stop being poor," Director Burns pointed out. "Personally, I
would advise them to buy five per-cent tax-free municipal
Now that the concept of curing a problem by giving up its
cause had been established, people found they could solve
their own troubles even without Director Burns' advice.
Those with sexual hangups renounced sex. Those who
feared crime In the streets stayed home. Those who disliked
busing, airplane hijackings and fouled-up Amtrak schedules
walked. And the Postal Service ran smoothly the very day that
peop!e stopped mailing letters.
All might have gone well if food prices, led by cheese,
hadn't continued to skyrocket. "If you can solve your
problem of the high cost of meat by giving up eating meat,"
Director Burns said sternly in a nationwide address, "you can
solve your problem of the high cost of food the same way."
In a week, American; were self-reliant, healthy, hangup free,
safe from crime and starving to death.
The country was fortunately delivered from the throes of
starvation by a sudden sharp increase in the smog level.
"That's your problem," Director Burns told the angry,
coughing delegation of environmentalists. But once again he'
showed the way. '
First, he tied a gag securely across his mouth. Then he
carefully placed a clothespin over his nose. . .
nopyrigm inronicie ruphihmg Co, 1973) J
page 4
daily nebraskan
friday, march 2, 1973
..- t,. . '
- .m,