Opinion
Lost time
U.S. senator should begin his campaign
Bob Kerrey is showing remarkable restraint.
During a debate this weekend at the Nebraska
State Fair, the Nebraska senator eschewed the
opportunity to announce the start of his presidential
campaign in favor of the issue at hand — his health-care
reform plan.
He chose, not to announce his candidacy despite the
presence of two vital ingredients to get a campaign for the
White House off to a rousing start: a down-home audience
and the national media.
Perhaps Kerrey wanted a different setting for his an
nouncement. Perhaps he wanted to stick to his earlier an
nouncement that he would wait until the end of the
month. Perhaps the danger of losing the Iowa Caucuses to
Tom Harkin was making him sweat.
Despite his restraint, Kerrey obviously is burning to
run.
“My interest in running for the presidency is based
upon the belief that the possibility of a better future 20
years from now will be determined by our actions today,”
he said last week.
Kerrey portrays himself as a leader looking to the
future. His health-care plan, although not unique, is one
innovative idea that shows his forward-looking stance.
Unfortunately, however, by looking too far into the fu
ture, Kerrey may be damaging his political prospects in
the present. And if he doesn’t win the White House first,
his plans for 2011 become unnecessary.
Unlike more prominent Democrats, he cannot afford to
. wait much longer. Bob Kerrey is a household name in
Nebraska, but people in other states have a habit of saying
“John” and leaving out the second “E” in his last name.
Nebraska’s Kerrey needs to let those people know that he
is not a senator from Massachussetts.
Kerrey lost a political opportunity last week when
another Eastern Democrat, New York Gov. Mario
Cuomo, said that, in theory, if push came to shove, all
things considered, in the overall scheme of things, proba
bly, possibly, maybe, he would support a Kerrey run for
the White House.
A Kerrey announcement on the heels of Cuomo’s hedg
ing, veiled endorsement would have had considerable po
litical value. Cuomo has been the darling of the Demo
cratic establishment for a long time, the man who was
supposed to put the ghosts of Michael Dukakis and Walter
Mondale back in the closet where they belong.
Kerrey needs the mass support and attention — even in
his home state — that perhaps only Cuomo can bring. An
Omaha World-Herald poll published Monday indicated
that 86 percent of Nebraskans approve of the job Presi
dent Bush is doing. An earlier poll indicated that a major
ity of Nebraskans thought Kerrey would be better off not
running.
Kerrey told The Associated Press on Tuesday that he
was undaunted by Bush’s popularity. What Nebraskans
want in 1992, he said, is a choice.
Harkin, Paul Tsongas and Jerry Brown are not viable
choices. Kerrey is. That leaves him with no choice of his
own. He must announce soon, very soon, or give up
speaking of the next 20 years for at least four more.
—EIJ>
‘Black’ not descriptive
I do not care what Andy Frederick
believes people of African descent
should be called. The whole idea is
based on something called self-deter
mination.
All the terms that have been used
to describe people of African descent
have been placed on us by other eth
nic groups. None of them describe
our continental origin. They all de
scribe us in terms of skin color, hair
color, hairstyle or according to ge
netic features.
For the first time, many “blacks”
are beginning to realize and appreci
ate their connection to the African
continent just as Asians, Italians and
other ethnic groups have done for
, years. I believe it is this pride in
Mother Africa that has many people
afraid. Imagine what would happen
to the “black” race if we suddenly
started recognizing that we have a
rich history, that we are capable of
ruling empires, discovering medical
philosophy — in case you doubt this,
check your local library under the
name “Imhotep” — and building
pyramids that leave historians as
tounded to this day.
Your comparison of someone
changing their name from “Barbara”
to “Bunny” to an entire nation of
people changing their name from black
to African-American is a complete
and utter insult. Furthermore, your
statement about there being too many
types of Americans shows your com
plete intolerance for diversity. Wake
up. If you plan to live in this country
over the next 10 years, you will find
yourself surrounded and outnumbered
by all types of Americans. As my
grandmother would say, “Put that in
your pipe and smoke it.”
Tamika Simmons
senior
news-editorial journalism
GARY LONGSINE
Money not education solution
Education 2000 indeed. Our edu
cation president leads the cheer,
as though the salvation of our
country required only that we get psy
ched about public schools.
President Bush gets up before us,
with his pale while legs sticking out
from a pleated, two-color miniskirt
and cheers, “Reading, ‘riling and ‘rith
metic! Rah! Rah! Rah!”
Critics shout back from the stand,
“So where docs the money come
from?”
Thai’s a typical American response.
The assumptions behind it show little
understanding of the problem and a
lack of visionary solutions: Public
education is OK; if we simply do
more of it our problems will be solved.
Not.
The most blatant assumption is
that public education, as organized
today, is basically a good thing, that
nothing is wrong with our schools
that can’t be fixed with an enema of
tax dollars and a little tinkering.
Proposals for revamping public
education arc a cornucopia of the
mundane. “Let’s pay teachers more
so they’re motivated to leach better."
Will a 5 percent raise result in 5
percent more literacy, 5 percent less
crime, 5 percent fewer teen pregnan -
cies? If we double teacher pay, will
these problems disappear?
Higher pay won’t attract better
teachers. A rocket scientist chooses
against teaching because classrooms
have 25 kids and no rockets, not be
cause of higher pay in rocket labs.
In any case, we shouldn’t expect
schools to solve all of our society’s
problems directly.
If we give teachers one mission, to
teach people how to think rationally
and critically, other benefits will fol
low. But if we simply add to the list of
dogmatic values that they must im
pose, their job will be increasingly
difficult, and new problems will spring
up to replace the old ones.
Other proposals include a longer
school day and abolishing summer
vacation. I shudder at the thought.
If I had been forced into a longer
school day and an endless school year,
I might have committed suicide. Or
worse, 1 might have been hammered
into a blissfully ignorant average voter.
I wouldn’t have had enough time
to educate myself in the variety of
subjects and thoughts never touched
on in school. I would not have been
prepared for college. I would not have
been prepared for life.
What will happen with the renewed
interest in education? Marginal changes
made to the education inputs will
result, at best, in marginal changes in
the education outputs. A little more
money might mean a few fewer kids
who can’t read, a few fewer gun
wiclding students and slightly higher
SAT scores.
But would a great deal more money
yield dramatic results? An end to illit
eracy? Less crime and poverty? Greater
social awareness?
Not on your life. The problem with
education has little to do with how
much money we spend per child.
Public education stifles the imagi
nation. It discourages critical analy
sis. It abhors independent rational
thought. It smothers artistic creativ
ity. Education manufactures indus
trial zombies out of children.
Not all education, to be sure. Col
leges exist to sweep up the waste
\A
from the first educational process and
turn it into something useful.
How does education produce nega
tive cultural effects? In school, at the
tender age of five, you and your peers
were segregated. Not from the oppo
site sex, not from other races, mostly,
and not from other religions, mostly.
You were separated from adults.
For thousands of years children
learned how to gel along in their
society by being with adults — par
ents, relatives and others. They learned
how to communicate, how to behave
and how to survive by hunting and
gathering, farming, shepherding and
cooperating.
Children today have very little
interaction with adults. They don’t
Icam how to interact with young adults,
with middle-aged people or with senior
citizens. The lack of experience with
people outside their peer group means
that young people come out of school
with very little understanding of life
as a process. They don’t quite realize
that someday they will be the old
people whom young people make fun
of and don’t have time for.
At its core, school is primarily a
baby-sitter. It is unnatural for chil
dren to get up in the morning, go into
a building, sit for an hour, move for
five minutes and sit for another hour
all day long.
No wonder Americans are not in
grime physical condition. We spend
illions of dollars teaching children
not to run, jump, play and, above all,
not to explore the world around them.
Then we have to spend more to teach
them physical fitness of an industrial
sort. Here’s an hour, kid, now run,
jump and get in shape.
What did we learn in kindergarten
through 12lh grade? We learned that
we were not artists. We learned that
we couldn’t sing. We learned that
math was hard. We learned that we
could never make a living as writers.
What can we do? Public education
probably will not change much, so do
what you can to minimize its impact
on you and your children. Fight for
your summer vacation and educate
yourself.
Longsine is a senior international affairs
and economics major and a Daily Nebraskan
column 1st.