Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Nov. 28, 1973)
J fl at 50 m.p.h.' W t u "I'Vo'-'e going t to J to do it editorinch.ef he!' ." ;. otn.'thisket and being 1 ': ,; h. " H.L. Stevenson, UP When it comes to the gasoline shot tage, it seems that President Nixon is a man of good intentions. His proposals, however, are reminiscent of many of his other remedies for the nation's ills: It's inadequate. In his Sunday night energy speech the President urged voluntary compliance with 50 m.p.h. speed limits until legislation can be implemented which will make the limit mandatory. He proposed a 55 m.p.h. limit for iony-distance buses and trucks. He also called for halting Sunday gas"' i;, sales. At least part of the reasoniny behind this proposal is sound. Go-( i nment e.winy experts say ii'SL-aieM has proven '.aii' types of cars can yet as injtvy as four more milej to the gallon if they are driven at about 50 m.p.h. Lower speed limits and the longer travel time needed for one to reach a destination will curb much non essentia weekend and holiday traffic. While a cutback in weekend driving will cool the economy, the hiief recession that might grow out of it probably will be mild compared to the economic problems which more likely might develop if we continue to waste energy resources. But, to quote W.C. Fields, "the road is fraught with imminent peril." Halting gasoline sales on Sunday and slicing speed limits are questionable approaches to a grave problem. Not allowing the sale of gasoline on Sundays does not guarantee consumption will be curtailed as much necessary. The lower speed limits, however, pose an even greater dw..f. iwn. JJ. Lun w..n right when he called Nixon's proposal "preposterous. ..unworkable. ..and ridiculous." The lower speed limits for cars thun for buses and trucks will contribute to highway accidents, a fact that even truckers admit. The lowe" speed liuvts, while providing some gasoline savings, are not necessarily right for ah vehicles. Late-model trucks and some cars are geared for greatest gasoline savings at higher speeds. Enforcement of these federal speed limits also might prove difficult. If other governors agree with Exo-s, It is po:.-;bii; tlut state law enforcement authorities might not be urged to enforce the measure wholeheartedly. Perbaus a better p'an would be gasoline rationing Nixon coho'ts have estimated that it will take an ann of 10,000 persons to idrninister a rationing program, a program which might cost as much as S10 million. Perhaps the public might resent rationing, as Nixon has said, hut not half as much as they would resent the possible depression which could grow out of a critical gasoline shortage. Also, crf.v.rmg ;r;!;s for 10 000 more persons might be wise when one considers thaf business leaders, men who usually are optimistic about the economy, have predicted as much as eight per cent unemployment next year due to energy sho: tuges. The S10 million cost of the program could be financed through government s.-vmgs on fuel which it could not obtain so easily. All in dll, the Nixon effort is well intentionecl, but the gasoline program is inadequate. Rationing would be a better step. iviichael (O.J.) Nelson 5 it , 1 !f jfisl Regent Robert J. Prokop Down memory lane Ed, to- s note IVher Regent Robert J. Prokop was .in ,MU graduate student he wrote a column for the Daily Nobiaskan. Entitled Porcupines, the cc'uim contained his philosophies and reflections on lite at what is now the UNL campus. One of those columns, dated Mar. 10, 1959. is reprinted below. By Robert J. Prokop By Robert J. Prokop It's too bad our Legislature, regents and factions of our administration still do not realize that some of their hoise and buggy ideas die Iving lost in changing times. Society demands that our rules and regulations be modernised. The first of these demands is social dunking. Modem business and state have diverted from the old idea of enterprise being accomplished over the desk to the present method of selling at cocktail parties and social ga therinqs. Regulations at school have hindered this side of education. In essence, we all know present drinking regulations and can sympithie with our administrative enforcement since their hands are tied. But I cannot sympathize with our rule making bodies and our governor who now seems to be more interested in cutting his throat m national politics. Since they are so old Jtivnoned, it bin ts us education wise. iH ' v;,e k m. Wilii-'ti-n i ''iw-'s.- . Nebraska University for the last four-years has been turning out intellects which are by no means educated in the fields of modern day social graces. In the past, the word alcohol has not been taboo. Today, however, fraternity, sorority and independent parties are not able to mix drinks for people so inclined. What are the arguments and amendments which would alleviate the above problem? t-irst, it is interesting to note that since 1954, the year of the big crackdown on University drinking, student arrests by the local city police have gone up percentage-wise. The reason is quite obvious: the rigorous enforcement of rules on campus has caused people to go outside of the University control Controls by campus personnel would better regulate this University problem. Basically, overindulgence would not be a problem, for a person is more likely to have one brew than one case. Secondly, our Legislature should re-examine their present position as compared to our neighbors, Kansas and Colorado. There is no doubt that our adjacent states have had tremendous success with 3.2 beer for 1 8-year-olds. Universities at Kansas, Kansas State, Missouri and Colorado have not had the problems Nebraska has had in the field of drinking. Of course, as long as our misinformed legislators and our governor continue to listen to the minority whose major object is to distort facts about alcohol, we won't get anyplace. Religious convictions which have been misconstrued by the opposition also give our rule-making bodies a wrong impression of the true view. Logically, anyone could take anything and construe it to appear evil. Third, we must face the problem: are students able to think for themselves? Controlling a student's social actions by rifjir unjust rules prevents the individual from acquiring reasoning power from within. What are some of the answers? First, a forum or meeting of the regents, governor-if he isn't too busy keynoting Harry Truman's visits--and the chancellor should sit down with a few individuals on campus and see what solutions could be brought out. This columnist would love to see this problem brought to light and leasons for decisions be made explicit to the general student body. Second, let's stamp out minority rule in our Legislature with majonty rule. Maybe mother's I'ttle boy isn't so after all. It's time Carrie Nation was axed but good. Third, let's not blame Dean Colbert, Dean Halgren or the so called "campus gestapo" for carrying out policies tb,.,y dro required to enforce. These gentlemen are doing a fine job in their capacity. Last, let's have a little better communication between students and administration. Let's all get together and straighten out this misconstrued problem. With the regents, chancellor, governor and proper student representation, a better solution of social drinking could be brought about. He who represents the people must share me iaeas ot the people. page 4 dm I ' nebraskan Wednesday, november 28, 1973
