Thursday, November 13, 1986
Pago 4
Daily Nebraskan
nitons
.1 r l
NebraMcan
Unlvtrslty of Nbratk-Unco(n
Deatltt penalty
Decision a victory for good law
The complex struggle over
applying capital punishment
proceeds. Last week U.S. District
Judge Warren Urbom struck
down as unconstitutional part of
Nebraska's capital-punishment
statute in an appeal by con
victed murderer Richard Holtan.
To be understood, Urbom's deci
sion needs to be placed in
context.
The broad restructuring of
states' capital punishment laws
came about as a result of a 1972
U.S. Supreme Court decision that
struck down 39 state death
penalty laws.
Because each justice wrote a
separate opinion, the precise
holding of the case has never
been wholly clear. But the per
curiam holding was that "the
imposition and carrying out" of
an arbitrary and randomly admin
istered capital-punishment sys
tem constituted "cruel and
unusual';' punishment, violating
the U.S. Constitution. ,. , ., .'. . ..
Jn . another case,. four years
later, Justice Stewart, who
announced the judgment of the
Court, specified that death
penalty laws can be constitu
tional if they are authorized "by
a carefully drafted statute that
ensures that the sentencing
authority is given adequate infor
mation and guidance."
What this means is that death
penalty laws must be sufficiently
clear so that the law is fairly
applied. Those in favor of capital
In a paragraph . . .
Orr's appointee good news for NU
Gov.-elect Kay Orr has ap
pointed HansBrisch, exec
utive assistant to NU Pres
ident Ronald Roskens, as her
chief of staff. That could be a
plus for the university. Brisch is
aware of the problems created by
the budget cuts and would be in
a good position to make recom
mendations. O The Lincoln Star called on
pollster Doug Evans of Lincoln's
Research Associates to determine
the popularity of UNL's
mascot, Herbie Husker. Research
Associates contacted 449 Ne
braskans Oct. 26 through 29 and
asked, "Do you think the Univer
sity of Nebraska athletic mascot,
Herbie Husker, gives a good im
pression of Nebraska?"
Fifth-two percent approved of
Herbie, 21 percent said they
didn't, and 27 percent said they
didn't know or cared. What the
Daily Nebraskan would like to
know is how many of those 449
people polled were students?
Had the Research Associates con
tacted students, the results would
have been different.
Did anybody count how many
times CBS's Dan Rather told the
viewing audience that the Demo
crats had gained control of the
Senate? At least ABC and NBC
stuck with most of their regular
programming and didn't bore
Jeff Korbclik, Editor, 4 72, 1 766
James Rogers, Editorial Page Editor
Gene Gcntrup, Managing Editor
Tammy Kaup, Associate News Editor
Todd von Kampen, Editorial Page Assistant
punishment as well as those
opposed can certainly agree on
that point. That is, the law should
be fairly applied in all cases.
It is on this point that Judge
Urbom found one part of Nebras
ka's death-penalty law running
afoul.
Nebraska law requires that
"aggravating" and "mitigating"
circumstances be taken into
account in deciding whether a
convicted murderer should be
put to death. One of the aggra
vating circumstances in Nebraska
law is that the murder "manif
ested exceptional depravity by
ordinary standards of morality
and intelligence." Now that's
really not clear enough to ensure
fairness. That is, the language is
not sufficiently precise to gua
rantee that like, crimes will be
punished similarly,
'.. Urbom held that the Nebraska .
Supreme Court, in its interpreta
tion of the matter, did not clarify :
the unconstitutional language
sufficiently td save the provision.
So he ruled that part of the law
unconstitutional; !
All laws should be clear, and
since statutes authorizing the
death penalty are the gravest of
laws, society needs to be espe
cially careful in drafting their
language.
Urbom's decision need not be
categorized as a "victory" for
either side of the capital
punishment controversy. His
decision is a victory for good law.
viewers by telling them results
after only 2 percent of the votes
were in.
O The United States is intent
on an anti-drug campaign, and
the Soviets have a campaign of
their own. The Soviet anti-drinking
campaign, started 18 months ago,
has cut liquor consumption and
worker absenteeism by one-third,
crime by 25 percent and traffic
accidents by 20 percent, a Polit
buro member told the Associated
Press.
O The seat-belt law, referen
dum 401, was repeal edin Nebraska
a major mistake. Ask law
enforcement officers how many
dead people they have unbuckled
from a car, and they will tell you
very few, if any.
O Nearly 750,000 copies of
the Harvard Lampoon's parody of
USA Today have been sold. The
parody contains a variety of fic
tional news stories and photos.
Pick one up if you have the
chance.
O You know it's getting to be
that time of year when you see
red and green decorations next
to the orange and black Hallo
ween ones. Christmas seems to
be getting closer every year at
least the retail stores feel that
way. Don't they know that eve
ryone puts off Christmas shop
ping until Dec. 24?
Is tine nuclear winter v&M?
Scientists lost credibility when politics influence research
. . quite despair of setting the pub-
"Liesandnottruthprevaihnthe prof George Rathiens of MIT lie record straight. . . . Who wants
land." andchairmanoftheCouncilforLivable to be accused of being in favor of
Jeremiah 9.3 $ Nuclear uteris the wors nuclear wars?"
Democracy is based on faith. Citi- example of the misrepresentation . is astounding given
zensobviouslycannothaveaccess 0f science to the public in my the press play ofthe issue at the hands
to all primary information sour- memory. " of scientists such as Carl Sagan. Rus-
ces necessary to discharge their respon- item: The leading British scientific sell beitz nas done an inestimable ser-
sihilities.Thev need to rely on experts.
Thus the integrity ofthe expert is fun
damental to the commonweal of the
republic.
If those with primary access to facts
distort or fabricate those "facts," the
very foundation of responsible demo
cratic decision-making is shaken.
Politicians have distorted informa
tion so often that they no longer enjoy a
widespread perception of integrity
flmnne the American DeoDle. Even if
most politicians are honest and for-
thright, abuse by the few has destroyed
the perceived integrity of the many,
Scientists traditionally have enjoyed
a much higher credibility rating than
politicians. But some scientists seem
intent on destroying this reserve of
good will. Just like politicians, even if
only a minority of scientists abuse the
reserve of trust invested in their pro
fession, the fallout would cast a pall
over the entire group.
The proximate cause of this risk is
the widely heralded, but false, specter
of the "scientifically" modeled conse-
quences of nuclear war a nuclear
winter.
There's no reason to take my word
for it. After all, I'm not a climatologist,
meteroiogisv -computer scientist or
physicst. But Russell Seitz, visiting
scholar at Harvard University's Center
for International Affairs, has done an
admirable job of uncovering the opin
ions of the experts. His valuable article
is published in the fall issue of "The
National Interest," and parts of that
article were republished last week in
the Wall Street Journal. The following
startling items were taken from his
Americans don't consider ideologies
if candidate has charisma, Big Mo
Does anybody remember Big Mo?
Sure you do. He was a character
who was introduced to America
by George Bush in 1980.
That's when Bush hoped to be the
Republican candidate for president
and after every primary he would prat
tle about how Big Mo whose full
name is Mo Mentum was behind
him.
As it turned out, Big Mo was with
Ronald Reagan, and Bush had to settle
for being as George Will describes
him a lap dog.
And Big Mo has been with Reagan
since, no matter what he said or did.
With Big Mo behind him, Reagan could
do no wrong, even when he didn't know
what he was doing.
At least that's the way it was until
Tuesday, when the Democrats took
control of the U.S. Senate.
It happened so suddenly and deci
sively that I had to wonder: Had Big Mo
abandoned Reagan?
So I went outside, put a wet finger in
the air to see which way the wind was
blowing, and, sure enough, I soon found
Big Mo sitting on a park bench.
What's up? I asked him.
"1 assume that you're talking about
Tuesday?" he said.
Of course. It looks to me like you
have changed loyalties.
He shook his head. "That's because
you don't understand. Sure, I, Big Mo,
was with Reagan. But that doesn't
mean I'm with all those other charac
ters." You mean the Republican senators
who were beaten?
"Sure. They were on their own."
But what about the rest of the
Republican Party?
"Look, I don't have time to mess
around with every rinky-dink in a blue
suit and a power-red tie who goes on
'Meet the Press.' "
So it was only Reagan all along?
mat?az ne Nature in its Jan. Z6 issue
Jim
Rogers
noted the demise in scientific objectiv-
ity and lamented: ' Nowhere is this
more evident man in me recent
iiieraiurn un iuiiru. "khi,
research which has become
notorious for its lack of scientific
inquiry. "
Item: National Center for Atmos-
pheric Research scientists Stanley
Thompson ana oiepnen ocnneiuer in
the Summer, 1986 "Foreign Affairs":
. . . on sciennjic grounas me demise of expert integrity. After all,
global apocalyptic conclusions of the Reagan adm inistration's moves sim
the initial nuclear winter hypo- piy confirm an already cynical view of
thesis can now be relegatea to a
vanishingly low level ofprobab-
lity.
Item: At a meeting organized to
present the findings of the nuclear-
winter model, Dr. Kista Tsipis of MIT
quotes a Soviet scientist as saying:
"You guys are fools. You can 't use
mathematical models like these
to model perturbed states ofthe
atmosphere. You 're playing with
toys. "
Item: Physicist Freeman Dyson of
the Institute for Advanced Studies at
Princeton said this about the nuclear
winter model: "It's an absolutely
atrocious piece of science, but I
"You got it. And now it's time for me
to start looking around for someone
else."
I see. You're already looking ahead
to '88.
"Sure. It takes me, Big Mo, a while to
build up a head of steam. It's not like in
the old days, before TV and primaries,
when I could save my energy for a con-
Mike
Royko
vention. Now I have to hoof around New
Hampshire with all those mopes."
Then give me a tip. Who's it going to
be? Dole? Bush? Kemp? Laxalt? Robert
son? He shook his head. "Forget it."
But what other Republicans are
there?
"Who says Big Mo has got to be with
a Republican? I'm non-partisan."
You mean it could be a Democrat?
He leaned forward. "Let me tell you a
secret. I'm not a winner.
"Right, I looked at him and told
myself, this guy has got it. When he
talks, people listen, even if he's not
really saying anything. When he makes
a speech, he can bring a lump to your
throat, a tear to your eye, and he
doesn't look like he used a blow dryer
on his hair."
What does a blow dryer have to do
with it?
"Blow dryers are out. Big Mo is never
going with anybody who tries to look
and talk like a cousin ofthe Kennedy
clan."
Then that rules out most of the
Democrats.
V L
( 17 0
mw i T -jt &. . m
w.Fiwu6t.u?upICSMVeinaict
ment against the scientific veracity of
tne nuciear winter nypothesis.
The question isn't one of whether
the world should avoid having a nuclear
war. Rather, the question is one of
intentionally representing bad infor
mation as "scientific" in order to
advance one's political beliefs. That's
wrong no matter what the cause is.
All in all, this has been a terrible fall
for truth. The Reagan administration
began the steep dive to the bottom of
the barrel with its "disinformation"
campaign about Libya. ("Disinforma
tion" is the Orwellian term for lying to
the press and the public.) Additionally,
the recent Iranianterrorist debacle
simply has added insult to insult. The
administration should be ashamed.
But the revelations about nuclear
winter greatly deepen disgust over the
politicians. But scientists are supposed
to be different, they're supposed to be
more objective, and thus their opinions
are supposed to be more trustworthy,
Scientists are supposed to be like Joe
Friday: "Just give me the facts, Ma'am."
One central foundation of the scien
tific enterprise is the claim to be
engaging in a dispassionate investiga
tion of the truth. That one claim osten
sibly divides the scientific community
from the community of the politicians,
Erasing that line bodes ill both for
society and science.
Rogers is an economics graduate and
law student and the Daily Nebraskan
editorial page editor.
"Not all of them. There's one Demo
crat who has everything Reagan has -that
lump-in-the-throat, tear-in-the-eye
sincerity. The fatherly manner. And
he's got something that Reagan never
had. Brains. Of course, Reagan never
really needed any. In politics, if you've
got charisma, you can always hire
brains."
So, tell me, who is this ideal Demo
crat? "Mario Cuomo."
You've got to be kidding. Sure, he's
dynamite on TV. He looks mature and
strong. But what about ideology? It's
just the opposite of Reagan's.
"Forget ideology. The Democrats have
wised up. They've picked over the
Republican ideology and are taking
what they can use themselves. Their
mainstream ideology is not going to be
much different than the Republicans'
mainstream ideology. And they're not
going to let themselves get McGov
erned or Mondaled again. At their next
convention, all the extremist special
interest whackos are going to be stash
ed in the back row or standing in the
alley. It's the Republicans who are
going to have those problems."
Republican extremists?
"Sure. You know what the single
most powerful group in the Republican
party is today? The religious funda
mentalists. Wait'll they really get going,
giving everybody the fisheye who they
suspect of being a humanist, and say
ing that it's sinful for a kid to see 'The
Wizard of Oz' because only God could
give the Cowardly Lion courage. 1
mean, how would you like to be a
Republican candidate when the litmus
test is whether you think the Tin Man
could have a heart?"
1986 By The Chicago Tribune
Distributed by
Tribune Media Services, Inc.
Royko is a Pulitzer prize-winning column
ist for the Chicago Tribune.
