Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (March 5, 1973)
--Vx V '
K -. : ;Tk -til
Wt 1.., ,
t W NOT Ac 0lJt. ,
i 5S lit' JUL
w : ti 4 iw r 1 1
Several years ago on the UNL campus,
fraternities generally held the view that
physical hazing was necessary to instill the
feeling of unity and spirit that was supposed
to characterize a fraternity. In the past four
years most houses have moved away from
this concept, but there remains a small
minority that hazes "once in a while."
Feeling that hazing is counterproductive, the
Interfraternity Council (IFC) and the IFC
Judicial Board are interested in attacking
this problem from two angles.
On eis the model house program, which
offers constructive alternatives without the
use of demeaning practices toward pledges.
The second approach is one of enforcing
the IFC by-laws in this area. It has been the
policy of the Judicial Board to act only
when a complaint is brought before it, but in
the last year no complaints concerning
hazing have been entered. A more aggressive
policy is needed, and it is high time the
houses got together to eliminate the last few
hazing hold outs.
The chance to agree with the editor of
the Daily Nebraikan on a student fees issue
is rare, and I'd like to take advantage of it
while it lasts.
Yes, the idea of cutting off student fees
for speakers only is about as sound as Penn
Central. There are two trains of thought in
opposition to fees-one responsibly reacts to
the possibility of imbalance in speaker and
other programs by demanding an end to
The other, and more sensibly, I think, is
concerned with the ethical and philosophical
problem of what amounts should be paid,
like it or not, to a tax to pay for a
newspaper and a whole slew of programs
which are necessarily related to the purpose
of John Z. Student's education.
The contention is that he should have the
choice of deciding to participate or not. Yes,
this involves the rights of speech and
press-but they involve the rights not to
support a speaker and to revoke a newspaper
subscription if you get tired of its
editor-which are most assuredly rights of
free speech and press.
So I agree with the contention that the
proposed amendment is a mistake, because
to attack speakers and not the newspaper or
other programs makes a mockery of the
whole reason for the bill.
Too little, too late
A brief note to CSL members and other
administrators (staff or student) from the
vantage point of an individual now on the
outside of the University structure: Isn't it
maybe a bit silly to concern yourselves with
a "Discrimination Board" at this point.
Financial Aid (E.O.G., etc.) isnow drying up
for most Chicano, Indian and black students.
PACE has become a liberal facade, all
student energies there appear to be gone.
Financial Aids employees and Regents
have compromised the "Program for Active
Commitment to Education" into oblivion.
All in all, there may be a discrimination
board, but who's it going to be there for?
Maybe, after much politicking, there could
come out of this land grant school a
recruitment program for "minority cooks
and custodians." (No disrespect meant for
the working people of the University.)
This is a call to anyone concerned about
having a say in influencing legislation in the
Legislature. Currently in the Unicameral's
Standing Committee on Labor, LB343, a bill
concerning Nebraska state minimum wages,
is being considered.
This bill proposes several major changes
in Nebraska's current minimum wage
structure which was first established in
1969. First, it proposes to increase the
minimum wage from $1 to $1.40 for 1 973;
$1.50 for 1974; and $1.60 for 1975.
Second, it proposes to increase the minimum
wage paid to those compensated by
gratuities from 75 cents to 90 cents per hour
in 1973; $1 in 1974; and $1.10 in 1975.
Last, it proposes to include those people
employed for three months or less under the
state minimum wage law for the first time.
It seems rather obvious that this bill
would better the lot of many people, mostly
students. With more student support, it is
very conceivable that this bill could become
President Nixon, in another of his executive
messages to Congress, announced his Human
Resources Budget" late last week. The overriding
spirit of the message seems to be a restatement of the
President's inaugural admonition to Americans that
they should be ready to do more for themselves and
expect less help from their government.
"The welfare mess cannot be permitted to
continue," Nixon said. So he is ending some of what
he called the well-intentioned socail programs of the
past which he said have resulted in "dismal failure."
Nixon announced that he is abandoning the broad
welfare reform proposal that he made in 1969 and
which was much touted in both of his most recent
presidential campaigns. He will not push for the
reforms "since the legislative outlook seems to
preclude passage.. .in the immediate future." This
means the President is giving up on his family
assistance plan which would have strengthened
welfare work requirements and, more importantly,
established a guaranteed annual income.
At the same time Nixon seems to be trying tc
establish himself as a welfare crusader. He claims that
his $125 billion human resources request is "nearly
twice the amount that was being spent on such
programs when I took office in 1969." But he fails to
point out that most of his budget increases have
resulted from additions to the Social Security
program. Social Security is self-supporting through
payroll taxes and, therefore, involves no greater
commitment by the Nixon Administration.
The possibility exists that, among other things, the
Nixon budget would end federal aid for low and
moderate income housing, cut health research, cut aid
to education, reduce Medicare benefits for the aged
and undermine efforts to strengthen rural America. In
addition, the Presdient has impounded half the
pollution control funds appropriated by Congress
over his veto, and, by executive order, he has ended
many housing and rural development proqrams.
Apparently, President Nixon is not yet ready to
begin treating America's domestic war wounds.
" Tom Lansworth
I'm -t-4? ef-ttelJiwm,
fab-fat (qcxHtncr's bill
I in a. S0t?l( jtrjcy
Opto Stiver li-jo 1
HUtV Pitfdt fay eyzs
monday, march 5, 1973
4kr -frr fl 'A 4 " ' -
-mm .. y.m
Powered by Open ONI