daily nebraskan
Wednesday, february 4, 1975
page 4
0
cm
Ticket proposal result f
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes letters to die
editor and guest opinions. Choices of material
published will be based on timeliness and
originality. Letters must be accompanied by the
writer's name, but may be published under a pen
name if requested.
Guest opinions should be typed, triple-spaced,
on nonerasable paper. They should be accompanied
by the author's name, class standing and major, or
occupation. AH material submitted to these pages
is subject to editing and condensation, and cannot
be returned to the writer.
letters to
What has traditionally been only a pain in the
rear for students may become a pain in the wallet
HS Weil.
For years students have tried to make a few ex
tra bucks during football season by hawking their
tickets, an income-producing tactic that has
become an American fact of life at sports events,
plays and other cultural happenings.
And during those same years, UNL administra
tors have tried to discourage, quite properly m
their eyes, the resale of student tickets.
And students who only wanted to give their
ticket to a friend or relative were doubly
penalized-they legally could not transfer the
ticket and they ran the risk of ticket confiscation
if a stadium official questioned the individual
who showed up at a game with the ticket.
Students, operating under pain of possible
ticket confiscation and stepped-up pre-game
stadium patrols, continued to occasionally sell
their tickets.
All the while, administrators decried the action
of students who sold tickets, implying that stu
dents were allowed to purchase tickets cheaply
and should not abuse that privilege.
That principle now has crumbled in the face of
one compelling motivator-more money.
Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Ken Bader
will propose to ASUN Senate and the Council on
Student Life this week that students be allowed
to transfer their tickets next year.
In turn, students will be asked to shell out
$12.50 extra for the 'legalization' of selling
tickets.
Added to the next year's planned student
ticket price of $ 1 7 for six home games (compared
to the same price for seven games last season), a
student transferable season ticket would cost
$29.50.
Traditionally, students have been given a break
on ticket prices because if there were no students,
there would be no Big Red. Faculty members and
staff also were given ticket-purchasing privileges
that affirmed their relation with the university
that sponsors the football team.
A faculty member's ticket always has been
transferable to family members. Faculty members
probably will pay about $25.00 for their tickets
next year.
The problem, administrators say, is that it is
unenforceable to demand that faculty members
not transfer their tickets.
The problem, it seems, is that the administra
tors responsible for the plan to change student
ticket policies suffer from an acute case of double
standard.
Either it becomes a matter of principle or a
matter of logistics, but the same yardstick should
be used for both students and faculty members.
If the principle is evoked, neither faculty
members nor students should be allowed to trans
fer tickets. If logistics is the key, it seems believ
able that the no-transfer policy is unenforceable
for both groups.
So why suggest asking students to dig deeper
for the $12.50 to magically create a legal transfer
policy?
Not to mention the unfairness to devoted
student football fans who never sell their tickets
and who would find the $12.50 a burden for
which they get no added options.
It is hoped that the policy is rejected by
student governing groups. It is unworkable and
unfair.
It can only be the product of a colossal bad
day in some Administration Bldg. office.
Vince Boucher
Slanted Abortion Reporting
I was both irritated and disgusted with your reports
concerning the abortion issue, (Third Dimension, Jan. 21).
It was obvious that the report was slanted and did not
take into account both sides of the issue. When will we
ever hear the alternatives to abortion? Yes, I agree that a
woman should have complete control over her own body
as well as her mind and her very person. What concerns
me is that an unborn child has that very same right. It
surprises me that feminists (and I consider myself a
feminist), who are so very concerned about women's
rights and people 's rights, seemed to have overlooked that
point. Children forced to live up to society's ideal of
"maleness" and "femaleness" are just as oppressed as
women. And what about our unborn children?
A woman has the right to decide whether or not she
will bear children. A woman is not required to raise a
child after it is born if she feels unfit to do so. There are
hundreds of people, married and single, who are forced to
wait years going through adoption proceedings and wait
ing for an available child.
Secondly, I felt that in your main source of informa
tion for your article: "Hospitals' Abortion Policies Vary,"
one Dr. Weston was an excellent example of someone who
feels that the state has the right to virtually "control our
minds" by making our moral decisions for us. The state
ment: "Weston said he thinks doctors and hospitals in
fringe on personal liberties when they refuse to perform
abortions for moral or religious reasons," made me stop
and think about the situation we're in. Dr. Weston, did
you ever stop to think that you, or a patient or the al
mighty, all-knowing Supreme Court may be infringing on
the rights of a particular doctor who does not feel it is
morally right to infringe on the rights of the unborn child?
Thirdly, believe it or not, Dr. Weston, despite the fact
that I am anti-abortion, and therefore considered "unpro
gressive" by you, I do not oppose sex education!
LizBrelin
ralph by ron wheeler
I'LL BE MINED IF MY PifflO fmA
MTU HIS COMMIE LIBERAL P0CTKW
IS 6MM TO LIME fJEXT M TO ME.
11" JT
0
1
WHAT DO YA THM OF THAT
U YA Lm-HAtl6 MMIST
SYMPATHIZER? v
N
13r -I Ml
iftri 1EEHH
god bless mm J
IPS
unh
word Independence Party rises
eaidl from Republican wreckage
By Del Gustafson
While political developments in New Hampshire
occupy the American press, the major portion of the
American electorate is only peripherally concerned with
such inter-party struggles. The contemporary political
scene is the domain of the independent voter.
He is tired of the coalition-building, compromising
unprincipled politics of the two major parties. He desires
if one can believe George Gallup, to stem the flow of
Individual substance into the never-satiated belly of the
federal government.
r"""1","W"-' "' " Hmmmmmm- , n1
t"w"J' WWPWWW MHIMMiimiWHMMMM .III I IWHWMMWHIIH.il III WW liliMMIH
iCo I J i v U- 75--C hr
Xilii LJSA, fc0 Open 8-5, Monday -Saturday ' ; 1
r ' 1 x y - Ml I n I
. 1135 R 432-0111 I I
It all adds up to a major disruption of the American
political structure if the unwillingness of the major parties
to take up the popular cry and battle Washington
con tines.
The embryonic Independence Party believes an
electoral majority awaits a party committed to the slaying
of the bureaucratic dragon.
WUliam Rusher, in his book The Making of the New
Majority Party, provides much of the framework for the
Independence Party. He cites statistical evidence to show
tnat the Republican Party traditional vehicle of conserva
tive sentiment, is dead or dying, while the numbers of
conservatives are increasing. The reason for this paradox
is the powerful influence exerted on the national
Republican Party by its minority liberal wing.
Out of the wreckage of the Republican Party, argues
Rusher, the traditional economic conservatives can be
salvaged. United with blue-collar social conservatives, who
generally oppose welfare, busing, abortion and detente,
they can form an unbeatable political party. The major
obstacle to such a synthesis is the economic issue. That is,
to what degree the social conservatives are willing to
support the traditional conservative goal of less inter
ference in the marketplace.
With the admiration accorded such practicioners of
limited government as Jerry Brown, it may well be that
the worker sees the virtues of the free market even more
clearly than Rusher thought. Firm in ti e belief that the
Republican elephant has gone the way of the dinosaur and
that the national Democratic Party is devoutly commited
to God-like government (omniscient, omnipotent, and
omnipresent), the Independence Party is attempting to get
on the ballot in many states such as Nebraska so that
conservatives are given a choke in 1976.
The Independence Party may never win an election.
i u omeday may be the merry serfs of the federal
n V u WashinEton-1 do not know; 1 am not a prophet.
tui it seems evident that neither major party is prepared
to dally with principle when power is at stake, Men of
principle-go Independent. .
' ""4.
