thursday, november 29, 1979
page 4
daily nebraskan
u
Energy conservation
proposal
deserves consideration
Although it is too soon to judge
whether a just-announced proposal
to promote energy conservation is
workable, a bill which will be intro
duced in the next Legislative session
seems to be a credible and note
worthy start to solving Nebraska's
energy problems. .
The so-called energy conservation
and independence act is the work of
a special energy committee chaired
by State Sen. John DeCamp of
Neligh. DeCamp says the 67-page bill
was designed to cover all aspects of
energy conservation.
The bill is thorough-with pro
visions ranging from monetary con
servation incentives to setting energy
standards for new or renovated
buildings and encourages the constr
uction of alternate energy . sources.
The bill, however, is not only
comprehensive, it also is amazingly
liberal and far-sighted -characteristics
rarely found in Nebraska legisla
tion. Most refreshing is the realiza
tion on the part of its authors that
voluntary conservation, without
incentive, doesn't work. The bill
addresses that problem by providing
loans of up to $3,000 for home
owners, tenants and businessmen for
energy conservation projects. ,
However, DeCamp, a sharp reader
of the public mind, says the bill is
unlikely to please anyone and he
predicts that getting the bill through
the Legislature will be a difficult
problem.
Unfortunately, he probably is
right.
A state that is unlikely to support
more than a 7 percent increase for a
financially crippled university is just
as unlikely to support the predicted
$200 million cost of implementing
energy provisions.
But it is high time that Nebraskans
take steps to encourage conserva-tion-the
cleanest, safest and most
reliable source of energy. It also is
the least expensive alternative to the
current crunch. If Nebraskans will
look past the immediate costs to
consider long-term benefits, they will
realize that the bill, at the very least,
deserves serious consideration.
Had Ms. Tiehen attended the talk I presented at the
. UNL Law College on Nove. 13th, her letter (Nov. 19th)
may have been written in- a different vein and with more
depth. She would have received enlightenment regarding
the legislative process and constitutional restrictions on it.
She would have heard the complex issue of abortion dealt
with in a non-simplistic fashion and could have joined in
the lively discussion.
Clearly, she has no understanding of the legislative his
tory of that monstrosity known as LB 316. People who
speak without knowledge are like people who shoot with
out aiming: they woefully miss the mark. A review of the
transcript of legislative debate will give her an education
in the law-making process and clear clouds of ignorance
from her mind.
Rather than consume time and space repeating infor
mation which she can obtain through a bit of reading, I
much prefer to ask Ms. Tiehen how much effort she and
her "pro-life" colleagues put into helping children who are
ALREADY in this world. Or does their interest in
"human life" end with birth?
Where are they when the Legislature grapples with bills
related to financial assistance for poor children? Or ade
quate medical services? Or meaningful education?
America is much given to short-hand thinking or slo
ganeering. I detected that in Ms. Tiehen's letter.
I shall appear on the UNL campus again, and I invite
her and all others to confront me publicly and develop
their point of view as I do mine.
Ernie Chambers.
' State Senator
l)One side of issue . . .
My letter is in response to two letters in the Tuesday,
Nov. 27th Daily Nebraskan. The content of both letters,
penned by Iranian students here at UNL, asked how
America could be so "racially" disciminating to Iranians
in violation of their visas. Indeed Behrang even alludes to
the "McCarthy era" and warns that it's not over yet.
In the same illogical manner by which the threat to
American military retaliation in the event of the hostages'
deaths has been twisted and termed "American Imperial
ism," or "aggression," many Iranian students fail to re
cognize some simple and basic facts. First, the special
scrutiny to which Iranians' visas are being subjected to is
based not upon their race, as they would prefer to con
strue it, but upon their nationality. That is a result of the
fact that Iran, and not the homelands of other students at
UNL and throughout the , U.S., has taken American citi
zens hostage and threatened them with death. The leader
of Iran and the mobs of Iranian citizens outside the em
bassy are the ones who empty garbage on our flag and
enthusiastically chant "Crush America" and "Death to
Carter." We see the Ayatollah, leader of Islam, call for the
violent opposition to and, supposedly, the termination of
a nation of "imperialistic, pagan infidels;" not the leader
of France, or Germany, or Korea, or Egypt, etc., etc.
Thus, are we to continue to welcome with open arms
the student guests of a country that so apparently hates
and detests us? Are we to look upon Iranian nationals no
differently than students from countries which we receive
no threats of death, no blackmail, no chants of anti
Americanism? Clearly, the treatment and resentment of
Iranians in this country is not based upon racial grounds,
but upon a normal and logical reaction to the current
events in Iran. I do not support the notion of deportation
of ill Iranian students, because I'm well aware of the fact
that not all support Khomeini in his dead-end position,
but I hope that this might, to some extent, explain to the
Iranians who feel persecuted why they feel these injus-
v Continued on Page 5
ReLLo,YooHoo1 ANVBoP7 HftRft oW6R A WfiRoNl AND ?
Civil rights aided by whites
WASHINGTON -As long as blacks are a politicah
minority in America, Vernon Jordan told the Capital Press
Club last week, it will be necessary for them to form
coalitions with other groups.
The Urban League's executive director may have been
responding to criticism of his recent remarks regarding the
meeting between some black leaders and officials of the
Palestine Liberation Organization.
ouUoQEfD raspberry
a
"No matter. It was a useful reminder that blacks, how
ever appealing they" ,: find the notion of political
ence, need allies if they are to translate their goals into
public policy.
That is simply a matter of political fact. But there is
another fact that black leaders would do well to address:
that blacks will continue to be unequal partners in what
ever coalitions they join "so long as they leave it to some
one else to pay their bills.
The sad truth is that hardly any black civil rights or
ganization is independent of white financial support.
It needn't be so. The National Urban League's annual
budget is approximately $6 million, but only $228,000 of
that money comes from individual contributors, and prob
ably less than half of that from black contributors. Most
of the League's budget comes from industry, foundation
and government sources.
OF THE NAACPS budget, also about $6 million
annually, some $3.5 million comes from branch assess
ments and, dues. Most of the rest is from tax-free contri
butions from foundations, corporations and large indivi
dual donations-which is to say white sources-anil may
not be used for advocacy purposes.
Even so, both the Urban League and the NAACP, the
two largest and most influential civil rights organizations,
insist that they are woefully underfunded.
But suppose blacks were serious about supporting
their own organizations. There are some 7.8 million black
American families. If each of these families contributed
$2 per year, it would more than cover the total operating
budget of both groups. Five dollars per family per year
would produce revenues of nearly $39 million annually.
The sacrifice of one pair of shoes per family per year
would raise well over $100 million.
There are approximately 13 million black' adults in
America. If each of them gave just1 $5 per year for civil
rights purposes, it would come to some $65 million
roughly ten times the annual budget of the Urban League
or the NAACP. .
The point isn't that the organizations should reject
money from any legitimate source, including nonblacks
and corporations in need of tax write-off?. The point is
that substantial black support-at negligible cost to indivi
dualswould "make the organizations financially indepen
dent, which would greatly enhance their political
independence. !
MUCH OF THE effort of the civil rights groups has
gone to support legislation . and litigation, to get laws
passed and enforced. The effort has been remarkably
successful. .
But most of the problems that confront blacks these
days do not involve laws and court suits. They involve ed
ucation and housing and employment.
What black Americans principally nccd.it seems to mc,
is the independence and opportunity for progress that
tomes irom ousincss ownership, irom producing pw
and services for general consumption:, from being
necessary. s
Recent statistics indicate that blacks are rising to
middlc-class status in unprecedented numbers. But the
numbers are deceiving. A huge proportion of the better
paid jobs blacks are entering are in the public sector:
government jobs that produce no product, jobs that are
plainly vulnerable to an epidemic of Proposition 13 fever.
That sort of independence would do more for black
progress than any coalition, "any legislation, any court suit
or any courting or Arab oil money qver could.
(c) 1979, Th Washington Post Company