Editorial
[Daily
Nebraskan
University of Nebraska-Uncoin
Amy Edwards, Editor, 472-1766
Lee Rood, Editorial Page Editor
Jane Hirt, Managing Editor
Brandon Loomis, Associate News Editor
Vir )ria Ayotte, Wire Page Editor
Deanne Nelson, Copy Desk Chief
Curt Wagner, Columnist
tt d'tud i "* &t
> -Ky
The plan, proposed by Regem Bon Blank, includes se
|lfecd%®wSag and six noi#0dng iSI |
: | But of those 12, the committee \m include only three
faulty members and one student
Bryan Hill, UNL’s student regent, offered an amend
ment to add three mote students, one Bom each campus,
: as ex-officio members of the committee, ©
: The regents rejected it unanimously, |
That’s too bad, because the students are the most poorly
represented area of the committee, and one of the regents
biggest constituent groups.
Blank’s first proposal included three students, hut Ire
knocked that number down to two - then to one ~ when
he decided to have only 12 members on the committee ~
as bylaws require. /Sgl*
instead of knocking the numbers down, the regents
I should have changed the bvlaws to allow more committee 1
; members. It might have taken more time, but the commit*
tee won’t be formed until October anyway, so another
: week would not have hurt • •
II What does tat is that student input tan die three
campuses, which Mill called “distinctly ditaem from
each other,” won’t be heard. Ctastudent will have to
represent each campus* needs - a treaty impossible task. |
. Regent Rosemary Skrupa of Omaha said students at
leach of tbe campuses have die same concerns, such as
tuition prices and parking, and are representadveof each |
! others’ interests, v'- * "• : , \
That’s not entirely true. Students’ concerns vary on
each campus, and tuition and parking are poor examples.
But if that’s the way the regents feel, why shouldn’t
faculty members from each campus have the same con*
owns? They all worry about salaries and parking, so
aren’t they representative of each others’ interests?
ino, mey arent. atiq neuner are me stuaems.
Regent Don Fricke of Lincoln said adding more student
and faculty representatives to the committee would be
“tipping the scales to the east end of the state.”
But students come from all over the state. At the Uni
versity of Nebmka-Lincoln, three of die last five student
body presidents were from western Nebraska. And they
were a lot more informed about dm omvenmy than die
“general public.”
If nothing else, the regents should promise that all three
l student regents will sit on the subcommittee to review the
| search committee nominees.
Without the 40,000 students who make up the Univer
sity of Nebraska, there would be no need for a new
president.
Tim regents should respect their concerns.
| ; ... /;Z?; :• . .:yAmy Edwards |
Meyer clarifies his stand
on money-spending decision
Dear Aaron Eckclbecker (DN,
Sepl. 7):
Pay close attention now, because
you obviously did not do so last time.
Not once did I advocate “putting
chains on free thought.” I fully agree
with an artist being able to draw or
paint whatever he wants. What I do
not like is being forced to spend my
money to support something I per
sonally can’t stand. If you want to
keep a painting, such as the one
mentioned, in your house or go see it
at a museum, fine. I can’t stop you,
nor would I even want to. Just pay for
it yourself. You want to discuss free
dont? Shouldn’t I have the freedom to
decide for myself where my money
goes?
The other point you obviously
missed was my “comparing the NEA
(National Endowment for the Arts) to
Def Leppard.” I did not do that. Had
you paid attention, you wou>u have
seen that I compared idiots like Def
Leppard to the idiot that did that dis
gusting painting. Now, don’t gel me
wrong. I’m fully in favor of idiots
doing disgusting paintings in this
country, they have that right. I just
don’t want to pay for it. If people
want to see a movie, they pay for it
themselves. I don’t spend my money
so anyone else can see the latest
Freddy Krueger movie for free. The
same practice should apply to this
situation as well.
Andrew Meyer
“The Silly Sophomore”
pre-med
9 GREKT K* S\ULV^
NOM^ ^ tM S*N
r>a^ n«W^W WE left this Stretch ks
* SCESVC OCE^sH Vta
Pfc0fc*6lW emem naxe
SONE EMTRK SUCKS.
ill I
I---——-—;—
Let bygones be bygones, UNL
Regents have a chance to review priorities, change positively
rt’s now been more than a
month since the NU Board of
Regents decided to fire sys
tem President Ronald Roskens. This
has been one of the most widely re
ported topics in some lime.
As die old saying goes, “I hate to
kick a dead horse, but why not;
everyone else has.
The Roskens firing has led to
many strong questions and accusa
tions about the operation, motives
and competence of the regents. It also
has caused political tension which
could hurt the university substan
tially. Things have grown so tense
that Thursday’s Lincoln Journal ran a
story about a NU faculty coalition
which anonymously is calling for the
resignation of board Chairman
Nancy Hoch. This column is begin
ning to sound like another bash-thc
Rcgcnts editorial.
Guess again.
It is ridiculous, bordering on stu
pid, for a so-called “coalition of NU
faculty,” or anyone else, to call for
the resignation of Nancy Hoch. Last
year, while serving as UNL student
body president and a member of the
NU Board of Regents, I had the op
portunity to closely examine the
board during a period of great transi
tion. Early in the year, I was amazed
at how differently members of the
board saw their role. I learned that
Regent Hoch and a few others felt the
board should be an active, concerned
and involved body.
They believed they were elected
to do all they could to give the people
of this state the best university pos
sible.
Other members believed in taking
a more passive role. One regent actu
ally told me that the board was * ‘here
simply to hire the president and then
let him do the rest.”
That’s outrageous. Do we elect
public officials to just sit back and
passively enjoy the perks of their
positions? In my opinion, the only
reason this regent, and perhaps oth
ers, even hold their positions is to
enjoy lh6 numerous dinners at the
Lincoln Country Club, the season
football tickets, the free trips to sunny
spots like Miami and Phoenix (for
Bowl Games) and the other benefits
of being major Nebraska political
figures.
Consequently, the board was di
vided and there were many political
battles between the two coalitions.
Often, it seemed that whether an item
m a a_
passed or failed came down to petty
politics rather than the merits of the
issue. The “passive” coalition
would go to great lengths to keep
Hoch and others from accomplishing
anything. I once sat through 10 min
utes of debate on a two-word amend
ment proposed by Hoch ip clarify the
language of a motion.
The amendment was defeated, in
my opinion, to put Hoch down.
Following the November elec
tions, a majority of the board seemed
to favor a more active role. In Janu
ary, with the election of Hoch as
chairman, and the emergence of other
regents in strong support of an active
board, changes began. For the first
time, I saw cohesion and direction on
the board with less political friction
and bickering.
Consequently, I firmly believe the
NU Board of Regents is a much better
governing body than it was a year
ago. For years I heard critics com
plain that the regents had no idea
what they were doing and no control
over university operations.
So it's quite ironic that now, when
we finally have a board with the
commitment to fill its duties and
govern the university — not to men
tion the guts to take a tough stand --
people arc calling for resignations.
Of course, we have to consider the
source. People (or coalitions) who
make strong accusations and grand
suggestions anonymously arc those
who are not concerned enough about
their ideas to take a strong stance.
So to the board I say, keep work
ing. As a former member I applaud
your progress and direction. Asa citi
zen I thank you for finally being ac
tive representatives of the people and
at last pulling control of the Univer
sity back where it belongs, in the
hands of the people of this stale.
But a major concern still exists.
Many people say the Roskens’ firing
has led to bad relations between the
regents and the Nebraska Legisla
ture. I whole-heartedly agree that
there is a problem. But I don’t think
the Roskens situation is the cause. It
only is a convenient excuse to air a
persistent and ongoing power
struggle. For some time, relations
between the regents and state sena
tors have been tense. Each body
seems intent on proving that it cannot
be pushed around.
It is a relationship of animosity
that has existed since the Nebraska
Supreme Court ruled, in Exon vs. NU
Board of Regents, that the regents
had considerable control over the
university’s budget. Now every lime
the budget comes up, senators sug
gest and recommend what the board
should do with its money, while the
regents maintain they can allocate
their funds as they sec fit.
Each body has a trump card; the
board has the Nebraska Constitution
backing it up, but the Legislature
holds a large ax above the board...
the power to give the regents as much
or as little money as senators sec fit.
When the regents don’t use funds as
“suggested,” senators can simply
cut funding the next year. Both bod
ies fight to prove their power and, in
the process, the university and the
state both lose.
i nis struggle is ocing piaycu wui
again. The veil is concern over the
handling of the Roskcns situation, the
truth (friendships and loyalties aside)
is simply one more opportunity to
exert power and engage in a political
dogfight. And unless all these elected
representatives are willing to put
their overgrown egos in chec k, or the
state constitution is amended, these
power plays will continue and the
university — the entire state lor that
matter - will suffer.
Times arc changing, folks, the
regents are coming to Lincoln to dc
more than watch Comhuskcr football
games. Ron is a great guy, but it
lime he left. Although the regents
may have mishandled the firing, he is
gone, and it’s time to move the uni
versity forward.
Opportunity awaiLs on the hori
zon, and the regents have a chance w
do make some positive change •
Someone told me that "you ,
grow when you’re comfortable, a
the regents may not be very comm
able right now, but they arc gr()’v'
Let’s hope they keep it up. Muyp?
we quit writing about the past, ;
will.
Enough said.
Petersen is a senior broadcasting ni»Jor
and a Daily Nebraskan columnist.
_h
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to the editor from all
readers and interested others.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, MOOR
St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.