Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (March 8, 1973)
-i--ij(r S;yaJ:tiar,ia a,'lji"j"JTiiiri&'-fii j.jig'i..j3ifcf a -u .y- ijy-JMyi,i-iii,y editorial 0 Candidates' debate The ASUN spring election is less than one week away. Last Sunday candidates officially began their campaigning, via literature and speaking engagements. The brevity of this year's campaign unfortunately limits the opportunity for UNL students to personally confront the candidates, most importantly those running for executive positions, on the issues. Because of this situation the Daily Nebraskan is co-sponsoring, with the Nebraska Union Talks and Topics Committee, a debate between the ASUN executive candidates toda'y at 3:30 p.m. in the Union main lounge. Hopefully, this forum, and others like it between now and next Wednesday, will enable students to press candidates for answers to several questions which are not fully explained in the published party platforms. There appear to be only two serious party slates in this year's election-the Get Off Your Apathy (GOYA) party and the Unity and Progress (UP) party. Although some students might agree with the Surrealist Light People's Party (SLPP) that androids should be removed from student government, few voters would go so far as to say that the proposed SLPP platform offers the best means of accomplishing that goal, or anything else. However, the platform statements of both GOYA and UP are not without their inadequacies. Both documents tend to be rather vague political, propagands. UNL student voters should read the party statements and go to this afternoon's candidate discussion prepared to seek intelligent answers to the questions they find incompletely explained in the platforms. One of the most important current campus concerns in the matter of student fees;-the ir4 admi nistratioa, and, ultimately,-- their vvery existence. GOVA says it is opposed to LB362, introduced by State Sen. James Dickinson of Millard, which would end mandatory collection of student fees. But GOYA does not comment on the recommendations contained in the recently completed Student Fees Administration Task Force report. Those recommendations contained some very serious implications about the role and organization of ASUN. Students should request more information from GOYA candidates on this question. Conversefy. UP opposes some of the task force recommendations, but does not comment on Sen. Dickinson's bill, which is also obviously important to ASUN and the campus as a whole. UP should be pressed for an answer on this matter. Both GOYA and UP cite educational reform as another major campus issue at this time, and both propose several programs aimed at improvement of UNL's educational quality and environment. The advisor-advisee system is seen as a key segment of the University education process. GOYA says that student access to information about courses and careers should be improved and proposes to accomplish this through a central office of information and a coordianted effort to find Nebraskans who are informed on specific professions or careers who are willing to talk with students. But GOYA does not say who would establish and operate, such an office-ASUN or the University administration? UP also leaves this question unanswered in relation to the similar, but more broadly based, information office it proposes. Both parties advocate various improvements in the advising system, but neither party says anything about the feasibility of such changes-given the traditional slowness with which the University accepts change, especially when the change pertains to faculty duties. GOYA supports ASUN funding to hire a lawyer who would provide free legal advice to UNL students. UP says that this much needed service is not feasible at this time. Student voters should demand that UP explain its position further. These are only a few of dozens of questions that the parties' platforms leave unanswered or unclear. Today's candidate debate offers students one of the few easily accessable opportunities during the campaign to get some answers from the campus politicians. Tom Lansworth a I Asyotf wall may realize, 'hs fr&nfe thing eboui Ihisutiv Is tfrat ft suppose h change people's Heads, 2u i cetrMrC traxly ends trp wi-cn 9 yiiTJtv puneniing. However, will ifois ctfnve $0 an end 7. of course tu 0s vfcir will Soon see !f Letters appear in the Daily Nebraskan at the editor's discretion. A letter's appearance is based on its timeliness, originality, coherence and interest. All letters must be accompanied by the writer's true name, but; may be submitted for publication under a pen name or initials. Use of such letters will be determined by the editor. Brevity is encouraged. All letters are subject to condensation and editing. Dear editor: Since the article about the increase in dorm rates appeared in the Daily Nebraskan (Monday, March 5), I nave received much feedback indicating that many people are confused about my position on the issue. I feel the article misrepresented by position and I would like to clarify my feelings about the rate increase. Yes, I agree with the increase, but only because it is the lesser of two evils. The increase is necessary because the alternatives would be more severe. If the rates are, not increased then either the dorms would run a deficit of $535,000 and probably go broke, or there would have to be a substantial ($535,000) cutback in services. A cutback of this magnitude would be a crippling blow to the dorm operation as it now exists. I support the increase because it is the only logical solution to the problem. However, this does not mean that I favor an increase in dorm rates per se! Glen Murray RHA President Vietnamese aid Dear editor: John Vihstadt's column (Daily Nebraskan, March 1) concerning aid to North Vietnam deserves some comment. Few, except that small pitiful group who would again commit us to war under similar circumstances, would quarrel with the idea that the United States owes all of Southeast Asia considerable aid for the awful destruction and terror it has wrought on the undeserving and hapless Southeast Asians. But I am appalled and sickened by attempts to mask this aid with justifications such as pacifying North Vietnam or providing an "honorable" conclusion to the Vietnam war. It is long past time for us to be honest with ourselves about Vietnam. U.S. intervention was an awful and costly mistake, totally without honor and serving no constructive purpose whatever. Anything positive that has happened to Southeast Asia in the past thirty years has been in spite of our actions, not because of them. While the war was raging such justifications as "peace with honor" or "self determination" were of dubious value at best. But now with the war's end, or at least an end to our involvement in It, such justifications can only continue our disillusionment. In rebuilding Southeast Asia we must realize we are redressing a dreadful wrong wrought on the area by the United States. Our aid can rightfully be considered reparations. Any other justification helps increase the possibility we might again make a similar mistake. Finally, it is ironic that Vihstadt mentions that U.S. aid to North Vietnam might serve to make the North Vietnamese more independent-like Yugoslavia. (Vietnam, especially the North, is traditionally anti-Chinese.) There can be little doubt that such independence was more easily assured by leaving the Vietnamese alone-starting in 1954. Let's be honest with ourselves and the world. Retribution to North Vietnam is for wrong-doing we can never really repay. Any other justification for such aid can only increase the possibility of future Vietnam-type tragedies. Chip Treen Apartment advantages Dear editor: I would like to express my thanks to the Board of Regents for making my decision on where to live next year easier. Without a doubt, the advantages of living in an apartment far outweigh those of living in a dormitory. Previously the advantages of easy accesibility to the campus and its facilities, along with having ones food prepared for him, made it convenient to live in the dorm. I was willing to overlook the minor disadvantages, such as the noise on a floor at night, the lack of weekday overnight parking and the inconvenience of having to purchase a Sunday meal. But the major problem, having to find accommodations for approximately three days at Thanksgiving, 20 days at Christmas and 10 days over spring break, hardly seems worth the $1,020 per year for the room. For $113 ($149 if one has a single room) per month one can find a suitable alternate place to live. If one can find a roommate to share a two bedroom apartment (the expense being equal if not possibly lower than dorm living) it would be worth the added expense of having to purchase a parking permit and the upkeep of a car, (which many students now possess). Apartment living would also provide a place to stay during those 33 days when the dormitory room one pays for is closed. If the regents, and the University, hope to retain the approximate 91 per cent capacity in the dorms then they had better look at the problems concerning dormitory vacation policies, overnight parking facilities, quality of food and the current alcohol and coed visitation policies. The $1,020 dormitory cost added to the approximate $1,600 tuition cost (for out-of-state students) will certainly drive students from the University's dormitories, if not from the University itself. Richard C. Zender '- - - page 4 daily nebraskan thursday, march 8, 1973