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