Daily Nebraskan
rr" n 0 n n
C (T) fl T (0) fl
Vow vote conoid decide
WnOTHTDOD li
Once again, it's election day. The run
off election between Action and Reach is
upon us.
For roughly the past six weeks, the uni
versity community has heard these parties
present their platforms. Last Wednesday,
the student body indicated that it was pret
ty well split when it came to casting a vote
for either party.
So we face the issues again, knowing
that this time, thankfully, the winner will
be decided. No matter how much or little
an ASUN candidate has to say, it is hard
to come up with new and gripping issues
with which to campaign for an extra week.
So give these prospective ASUN presi
dents a break if their ideas and arguments
haven't been earth-shattering in the past
seven days. Give them a break if all they've
done is reiterate their stands and propos
als. And give them a hand for all the time
they've spent campaigning when their ef
forts and arguments often fall on deaf cars
or are regarded as little more than rhetoric.
ASUN
V
race
The winner will come out with a title,
that, granted, will look nice on the job res
ume. But it can be a lot more than a title
if the president accomplishes his or her
goals.
Let's not be too critical of these candi
dates for believing they can make a differ
ence. If they really were in this for person
al gain or recogniation, don't you think
they would be channeling their efforts into
a less thankless job, one that offers some fi
nancial gain? Undoubtedly all of these can
didates could attain a more quantifiably re
warding job or position, but instead they
chose to participate in student government
because they value its potentials.
The candidates believe they can make a
difference. And today, even more than a
week ago, you can make a difference.
Vote.
All it takes is a one-vote margin to de
termine who, once and for all, will be the
next ASUN president. If the original clec-
y Ks
I AI it--.- v 1 ' '-" FVN.
yy y-ycy MSN
I 1 l - .J r; ,. r ' V -rf ill'
... u y ri;
Nrs C- ,J ifV-
7 ,
V) if rat
'J J ...
t i i ;
tion results are any indication of the stu
dent opinion, the run-off could be just as
close. You might cast the ballot that could
decide the race.
It was encouraging to see the 5 percent
increase over last year's voter turnout, but
when only 14 percent of the student body
If s time to shake 'psychic mgudE
comes to the polls, one could hardly say
the response was overwhelming.
Just think, this time when you go to the
polls (which are located in both unions, the
residence hall food services, CBA, Burnett
and the College of Law), you'll only have
four ballots to cast. It won't take much
time. It could make a difference.
n
treaty
Helen Caldicott describes it as "psychic numbness."
Jonathan Schell sees it as symptomatic of a "psychotic
nation." Others see it as plain old "denial of reality."
I am now going to skirt the fine line between telling
people how to live and simple opinionated claptrap.
When one sees a problem with society, and if it seems to
y
Dave Milo
Mumgaard
hang as chains on our lives as thinking human beings, one
cannot "speak low if you speak love," as Shakcspear re
commends. Rather, one must speak loud when speaking
of lives only partially lived, of people who refuse to see
the world around them.
Dr. Helen Caldicott, president of Physicians for Social
Responsibility, spoke in Lincoln this weekend. One of the
points she made was that American society doesn't seem
to want to know about the dangers of nuclear war hang
ing over our heads. She noted that in 1979 our nation's
defense computers detected incoming missiles (one of
many false calls). Due to a number of factors (she thinks
the president was in the bathroom), we came within
minutes of unleashing our nuclear arsenal, guaranteeing
annihilation for both the Soviets and ourselves. The
British and Canadian newspapers carried (his story front
page center, but here in the "blissfully" ignorant United
States, the New York Times only carried a one-inch blurb
on the obituary page. Caldicott claims this is but one
example of our "psychic numbness."
Lllen Goodman recently wrote about a series of inter
views conducted with grade school children in the Boston
area. These children were asked, for instance, what they
wanted to be when they grew up. One would probably ex
pect firemen, nurses and football players to dominate. In
stead, there was a lot of concern by these children that
they wouldn't even make it to be a "grown-up," because
there would be a "nuclear war" before then. 1 note this
because it stands parallel to our behavior here as univer
sity students. Our frantic drive to get degrees and jobs and
gain financial security as fast as we can, is not our exhibit
ing hop for our future; rather, it reeks more of "getting
mine while I can."
Now, I'm not predicting the apocalypse. I have a
tremendous amount of hope for humanity, but only if we
cease denying reality. Cruise missiles will be deployed
within two years, and then we can literally have bombs
hidden in our closets. Don't expect the United States and
Soviet Union to trust each other after that. So we have
two years to get rid of cruise missiles, and this means we
all have to, at tho least, pay attention to that fact.
Students recently campaigning for student government
railed about student "apathy." It's as if we disassociate
ourselves from everything in order to make our lives some
how easier and more ordered. Our only concern is about
"getting a job" and learning those things which will help
further our "careers." The reality is that we have an inter
connected world, with the fate of all individuals integrally
tied together. To describe our behavior, "selfish" is an old
term, but a good term. A finance class of mine is a feast
for the eyes in this regard; almost almost all are future
financiers already thinking of employment in percentage
points rather than numbers of people unemployed.
1 distribute leaflets on campus occasionally, as do
many people. We all have certain bits of information to
offer, and we certainly are not out to disturb people's
serene equanimity. All we desire is an extended forefinger
and thumb, a brief glance, and maybe a thought or two.
But so many students pass by with their heads down,
hands in their pockets, sometimes saying things like "save
a tree," or "it's none of my business." Oh, yes it is, and
the day we all wake up to that fact, we can fully tackle all
the disturbing problems in society. Ignorance is the bane
of a civil society. Ignorance fosters "psychic numbness."
- An ignorant student should be a contradiction in terms.
tTtwoiigglh) a bittern toongoie: WooTmeini in medocaS draff!
Before you read any further, do the following facial
exercise. Stick your tongue out a bit and press on it
lightly with your top and bottom teeth. This will enable
you to quickly bite you tongue when you are tempted
to blurt out: "I told you so!"
Now for the news.
For the past many years, anti-ERA forces have gone
about warning America that if we passed this constit
utional amendment our daughters would be eligible for
;
- , I
Ellen
Goodman
the draft. Any woman who wanted equal rights, they said
darkly, was asking for war.
Well, Greetings from Uncle Sam. Months after the
defeat of the ERA, the Department of Defense has a
proposal that will make women eligible for the draft
for the first time in American history.
Bite.
The proposal, which barely has been noticed, is part
of the plan to begin registering medical people again.
Not medical men - medical people.
To put it plainly, the DOD would like to amend the
old "Doctor's Draft" codes by, and I quote, "striking
out 'males' and inserting in place thereof 'persons.' "
Among the "persons" are female doctors, nurses, phys
ical therapists, pharmacists, podiatrists, veterinarians,
and "any other ancillary or technical" health-care worker
between the ages of 18 and a half and 46.
How did this happen, you ask, without the ERA?
Excuse me for a moment while I take another nip of
my tongue.
There never was any guarantee that women wouldn't
be drafted. The recent Supreme Court decision gave
constitutional approval to an all-male draft. But it didn't
outlaw a coed draft. They left the whole business up to
Congress.
The armed services, meanwhile, have been what might
generously be called ambivalent towards women in their
ranks. There are those like retired Gen. William Westmore
land, who feels "no man with gumption wants a woman
to fight his battles." There are also those like Brig. Gen.
Cecil Neely, who says that his men "think the women
are pretty; they like to have them around."
Since the defeat of the ERA, the Pentagon has hacked
away at the rights of those women who actually want to
be part of the military. They ended coed basic training,
reduced the number of female volunteers they'll accept,
and made 23 more jobs off-limits.
They will add no more than 1 ,000 women a year in
the next five years. These women will no longer be
allowed to become carpenters, masons, electricians or
engineers because, we are told, those jobs are "combat-related."
At the same time, they are now asking for the right
to draft women who don't want to be part of the mil
itary. Lt. Col. Tom Schumann, the department director
for health manpower, says frankly, "To us, it's just a
need. When you consider that many of the health-care
occupations are composed primarily of females, you're
not going to get the numbers you need if you can't go
after the females."
When asked whether there wasn't some contradiction
in this policy in lieu of anti-ERA arguments, Schumann
chuckled in the friendliest way.
Several other folks at DOD made a special distinct
ion. Nurses, they said, were not in combat roles. They
should tell this to the Army and Navy nurses of other
wars, especially 100 nurses who were prisoners of war
for three years during World War II, or the female veterans
of Vietnam.
If all goes according to plan, the medical draft will
be submitted to the Office of Management and Budget
at the end of April and then submitted to the Congress
as part of the defense legislative package.
It would be ironic if the Reagan administration -hostile
to the E and the R and the A - was the first to
get a law passed that forced women to register for the
draft. Who was it who said that women would get equal
responsibilities before they got equal rights?
Not me. And I've got the teeth marks on my tongue
to prove it.
(c) 1983, Th Washington Post Writarj Group
