The Nebraskan
Tuesday, August 13, 1985
(QHltC
Page 4
o
Policies, not looks
make a governor
With Gov. Bob Kerrey getting closer to mak
ing public his decision on whether to run
for a second term, controversial LBC62
may prove to be an important issue standing in
the way of his re-election. But why should it?
When Kerrey signed LB662 he was well aware
that it could prove to be an unpopular decision.
That he signed the bill before all its problems
were worked out may have been a major factor
placing some doubt in the public mind about
Kerrey's decision making ability. But after a
brief period of indecision, which included Ker
rey almost calling a special session of legislature
for the repeal of the bill, Kerrey has stuck to his
decision and has announced that he would sup
port LB662 as it stands.
There was some skepticism that these actions
were an indication of Kerrey's own doubt of the
feasibility of school consolidation, and some
evidence may suggest that Kerrey's decision to
stick to his original decision was based on him
not wanting to undermine a petition already
calling for LB662's repeal. But is any of this really
the issue? Isn't it Nebraska's desire to have more
than just an image-oriented leader in the state
house the real concern?
It's a problem inherent to the entire political
system of this nation when it becomes apparent
that more than a fair share of politicians are
voted into office on issues of image and incum
bancy rather than leadership. And with Kerrey's
good looks, confidence and girlfriend, these
issues are ever more present. But they should
not be a problem.
When Gov. Kerrey mulled over the thought of
LB662's unpopularity, his indecision may have
made him appear a bit wishy-washy, but would
we rather have a leader who is concerned about
public opinion or one that doesn't take popular
opinion into account when determining the feas
ibility of a bill? Surely LB662 is not an issue that
would lead to the conclusion that Kerrey is all
fluff and no substance.
In the coming year it will be important that
Kerrey emphasize policy to assure the state that
he will make a good leader for another four years
if he decides to run. But it is equally important
that the state be patient with our governor and
avoid allowing shallow public opinion to per
suade us.
Editorial
Policy
Unsigned editorials represent official policy
of The Nebraskan, summer 1985 edition of the
Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by The Nebraskan
Editorial Board. Its members are Stacie Thomas,
editor in chief; Gene Gentrup, news editor; Kat
hleen Green, associate news editor; Sandi Stuewe,
advertising manager, Mary Hupf, assistant ad
vertising manager, and Jim Rogers, editorial
columnist.
The Nebraskan's publishers are the regents,
who established the UNL Publications Board to
supervise the production of the paper.
Editorials do not necessary reflect the views
of the university, its employees, the students or
the NU Board of Regents.
EDITOR
GENERAL MANAGER
PRODUCTION MANAGER
ADVERTISING MANAGER
ASSISTANT ADVERTISING
MANAGER
CIRCULATION MANAGER
NEWS EDITOR
WIRE EDITOR
COPY DESK CHIEF
SPORTS EDITOR
AHTS & ENTERTAINMENT
EDITOR
NIGHT NEWS EDITORS
PHOTO CHIEF
LAYOUT EDITOR
PUBLICATIONS BOARD
CHAIRPERSON
PROFESSIONAL ADVISER
Stacie Thomas, 472-1766
Daniel Shattil
Katharine Pollcky
Sandi Stuew
Mary Hupf
Brian Hoglund
Gene Gentrup
Donna Slaaon
Julia Jordan Hendricks
Mike Rellley .
Bill Allen
Jeff Korbellk
Donna Sitaon
Mark Davit
Kathleen Green
Chris Choate
Don Walton, 473-7301
The Nebraskan (USPS 144-080) Is published by the UNL
Publications Board Tuesdays and Fridays during the summer
The Daily Nebraskan is published Monday through Friday dur
ing the spring and fall semesters.
Readers are encouraged to submit story ideas and com
ments to the Nebraskan by phoning 472-1763 between 9 a.m.
and 5 p m. Monday through Friday. The public also has access
to the Publications Board.
Postmaster: Send address changes to the Daily Nebraskan,
34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
Second class postage paid at Lincoln. NE 68510.
ALL. MATERIAL COPYRIGHT 1985 DAILY NEBRASKAN
WNBfiMBNT fO? ( W D f ' V "A
THOSE WHO ARE&P. n VJ vNlwaHtB
L . rzJMJVHH PUNISHMENT 5
I T"CA I lklt 1 I SETS"? IGVV MAfff I ( 1M It
El .ltfT- r E 1 - V VP 1 ii nil H 1 StebK F
fl Jijap-VL. r " I i V 1 I r inn 1 sJir
ULi.U 1 . LLJ
10
Mew eonsewMism miraws old
New policies oriented toward 'social reality
The rhetorical winds of conservatism are
changing: A new social attitude is in the
air. The new conservatism, however, is
really the very old. On the one hand it still
distinguishes itself as against the liberal defend
ers of a vast and burgeoning civil structure, yet
more importantly, the new conservatives distin
guish themselves also as against the barren civil
minimalism which has been the dominant con
servative vision (or, more accurately, anti-vision)
for the state since the civil war.
-
Jim
Rogers
What the new ideology (which probably, as
Russell Kirk emphasizes, really is not an ideol
ogy, but more of a method or perhaps even more
accurately, a normative aesthetic vision) recog
nizes over the old, is that apart from the syste
matic demands of philosophical commitment,
there exists a very real social reality which must
be engaged in order to articulate and implement
just and humane policy.
Politically, conservatism is abhorrent of pol
icy catastrophe; that is, the will of revolutionar
ies (both of the left and the right) to make a
clean sweep of the small matter of the status quo
and set up the new edifice upon the ashes of the
old. These revolutionaries are not wild-eyed
youth, but rather the ideological radicals cur
rently seated in government who are unwilling to
engage in the difficult process of statecraft, but
opt for the easy policy path of catastrophic or
wholesale rather than incremental change,
Examples of this shift, abound. For example,
one theologican associated with the Christian
right argues in a recently published book that
revolutionary diminutions in the amount of
social welfare is immoral unless non-statist
mediating social structures (such as families,
churches and community programs) are in place
to pad the impact of the change. The policy
metaphor is one of a gradual weaning of culture
away from welfare dependence a dependence
which none of these conservatives doubt has
pathetically twisted the potential for civil virtue
within the American character.
Similarly, more secular commentators such as
George Will have argued for social support sys
tems. Actually, he's quite willing to call his
program a system, but it is quite a different
manifestation than the current horrendous cul
tural albatross generally known as welfare. He
locates the root of his advocacy in the continuing
national need for social cohesion as well as the
need for conservatives to maintain a pragmatic
policy orientation in order to avoid becoming
irrelevant to the policy process. This pragama
tism does not require the conservative to give up
his or her unique vision of good government, but
simply to recognize that only so much is politi
cally feasible at one time against employing a
sort of weaning metaphor.
American conservatives have aptly come to
recognize, as Benjamin Disraeli, that "protection
is not a principle, but an expedient." This new
pragmaticsm one guided by the basic sensi
bilities of traditional conservatism can do little
but help the American political process as we
approach the time of hard choices which must, I
believe, inevitably follow the current remarkably
peaceful political era of the Reagan administration.
Nebrakkan
ME
Letters
Support urged
for ASUN bill
This is 1985, not 1958 yet it's hard to
believe that the members of our student govern
ment know that.
Last spring, with a week of school left, they
passed bylaws doing away with discrimination in
ASUN and student organizations. This 'non
discrimination' bill was a bold step for ASUN:
they didn't outlaw slavery until 1965.
So what happens? The bill is vetoed by Presi
dent Keating, the day before school gets over.
His reasons? Too specific it lists "discriminat-ed-against"
minorities such as place of residence
(Gerard, that means dorms, off-campus, or Greek
units), and sexual orientation (gays), and color,
and creed, and religious beliefs (ie, 'traditional'
minorities).
How can discrimination be too specific? When
is a minority too small? .
ed?
.when they are eliminat-
Let's remember that people are people
(thanks, Depeche Mode). Membership or appoint
ments should be based on a person's ability to do
the job that's all. Every person should have an
equal chance to succeed
During the first days of this school year, the
ASUN Senate will attempt to override this veto.
If you are concerned (and you should be, lest you
be blacklisted too!), please contact your col
lege's ASUN Senator(s). Don't know them? Give
the ASUN office a call (2-2581); they will pass the
message along.
Let's hope that this override passes Student
Senate with the same resounding vote that the
original bill did.
Brian R. Golder
junior
pre-law
Letter
Policy
The Dailv Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to
the editor from all readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publication on the
basis of clarity, originality, timeliness and space
available. The Daily Nebraskan retains the right
to edit all material submitted.
Readers also are welcome to submit material
as guest opinions. Whether material should run
as a letter or guest opinion, or not run, is left to
the editor's discretion.
Anonymous submissions will not be consi
dered for publication. Letters should include the
author's name, year in school, major and group
affiliation, if any. Requests to withhold names
from publication will not be granted:
Submit material to the Daily Nebraskan, 34
Nebraska Union, 1400 R St., Lincoln, Neb.
68588-0448.
