Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Sept. 20, 1991)
" ~ Jana Pedersen, Editor, 472-1766 ^A A Daily Eric Pfanner, Editorial Page Editor Pac*p , W _ Z. —_ m T 1 ;1 Diane Braylon, Managing Editor 7 I lmninn Nebraskan --““u m. M JL L JL JL m. Editorial Board Brian Shcllito, Cartoonist University of Nebraska-Lincoln Michael Stock, Columnist Everyone’s problem UNL police, alone, can t improve lighting s One University of Nebraska-Lincoln assistant professor is trying to bring concerns about nighttime campus safety to light. Christina Brantner, an assistant professor of modem lan guages and literature, said dark walks from her office to her car at night made her think some areas of campus were lighted inadequately. As a new member of the Academic Senate’s parking com mittee, Brantner is doing what she can to increase the amount of lights on campus. She walked around campus at night with a map in hand, marking places she thought were too dark. Ken Cauble, interim director of the UNL police department, received a copy of Brantner’s map and said he thought lighting is dim in some areas but not needed in others. Cauble maintained that all areas of campus are safe because police patrol dark areas more carefully. He may be right on that count. He also is right on another. .. (A)s long as there is the perception that there is a problem, there is a problem,” Cauble said. Until lights illuminate every late-night walk on campus, there is a problem, even if that problem only is perceived. On her night walks, Brantner also found lights that weren’t working. That problem should be corrected. Cauble said he, too, planned to walk at night on campus to determine where more lighting was needed and to report to facilities management where lights weren’t working. His initiative should be commended. But the solution to safety in dark comers of campus shouldn’t be left up to the police department or facilities management. Missing lights only can be fixed when they are reported. “Everybody knows it’s a problem, but nobody’s really inter ested in doing anything about it,” Brantner said. If only more people at UNL were as concerned about nighttime safety as Brantner. --- -11 • • - 1_ Administration must consider itself part of the whole picture I am dismayed that the UNL administration is proposing to cut primarily teaching positions includ ing the elimination of the Classics and Speech Communications depart ments to meet its quota of required budget cuts. Since teaching is the primary function of a university, the teaching positions must be the last to go in case of financial exigency. Has any thought been given to eliminate some administrative positions? Elimi nating one administrative position may save enough money to support the whole classics department. In time of financial difficulties, the university community (students, faculty and administrators) must take a careful look at the whole picture starting with the administrative struc ture. Can the university faculty fulfill its missions of leaching, research and community service with fewer ad ministrators? The university has col leges ranging in size from many de partments to just one department Could one save on the expensive adminis trative overhead of a small college by merging its departments with another college? Could the university man age with fewer vice chancellors and their assistants? Since Dean Peters of Arts and Sciences did not recommend the elimi nations of the Classics and Speech Communications departments, 1 would like to see his recommendations, as well as those of the other deans, made public. Since the faculty senate sup ported vertical cuts, I would like to see that organization come up with its own recommendations. As the budget cut discussions proceed this fall, I hope the questions raised above and many more raised by others are thor oughly discussed and answered be fore the final decisions are made. S. S. Jaswal professor of physics and astronomy Speech majors respected, need to suggest options I feel for the speech majors who are trying to save their department and I respect them for rallying and not going down without a fight. However, that respect only goes so far. Until the speech majors stop whining and suggest an alternative solution to the budget cuts, they don’t have my support. The old clichd that if you are not part of the solution you are pan of the problem applies here. The budget cuts have been mandated, they are criti cally needed, and if the speech ma jors want to save their butts, they had better suggest alternatives to cutting their program. The vice chancellors have carefully studied which depan merits were the least important and they made their decision. Until the speech communication majors can suggest other, lesser programs that affect fewer students, they will have to accept the termination of their department. Everyone is begging for money and no one wants to lose their free handouts. However, people must realize that the source is not unlim ited and cuts must be made where they least affect the university. Gene Paulsen sophomore mechanical engineering pnmHHWi mem v ■_s sfasattEEBP^' DAVID REITER North trial lacks clear end Earlier this week, special prose cutor Lawrence Walsh gave , up his attempt to reinstate three felony convictions against Lt. Col. Oliver North. A federal judge dis missed the case against North at Walsh’s request. Walsh explained that “the government is not likely, in the unique circumstances here presented, to be able to sustain a successful out come.” Three convictions against North that resulted from his 1989 trial were either overturned or set aside on the grounds that evidence leading to those convictions was influenced by North’s 1987 congressional testimony under immunity from prosecution about the Iran-contra affair. For Walsh to get the convictions reinstated, he had to prove that none of the evidence used in North’s 1989 trial was influenced by the congressional testimony. Last week that task became virtu ally impossible when former National Security Adviser Robert McFarlane stated that his own testimony at North’s 1989 trial was influenced by North’s 1987 testimony on the Iran-contra affair. The upshot is that the case against North was not dropped because of insufficient evidence or because the evidence was unreliable. Instead, the case was dropped because it depended crucially on North’s congressional testimony under immunity. Even though the effort was cut short, trying North has been very expensive and time-consuming. The 1989 trial lasted four months and involved 67 witnesses. The group headed by Walsh included seven lawyers and 31 support staff mem bers. Some have questioned whether Walsh should have pursued the case in the first place, knowing that suc cess would be hard to achieve given the immunity of North’s testimony. But in an article about the trial, Georgetown Law School Professor Paul Rolhsicin said the process was valuable: “This was very informative to the public in making decisions on how to vote and whether there should be reform in the government.” “All of this will make it less likely for this sort of thing to happen again,” he said. Rothstein’s assertions arc question able. The trial against North did not show the public how to vote. The Iran-contra affair is a blot on the Republican party. North is a Republi can and a political conservative, and he is responsible for the covert opera tion that generated the Iran-contra affair. But there is no logical connec tion between conservative political views and the Iran-contra affair. Al though conservatism is committed to the value of democracy, it is not committed to the value of promoting democracy through illegal means. It is also unclear that the case shows whether reform in the govern ment is needed. We didn’t need the North trial to know that government officials should not break the law. Fi nally, it is questionable whether the failed case against North actually lessens the probability that something like this will happen again. The North trial didn’t show us the way to an improved government. Of course, that wasn’t its main purpose. The main defect of the trial is that it failed to bring the whole story to a clear and decisive end. After the case was dismissed, North declared that he had been “totally exonerated.” This is true if interpreted to mean simply that the case was “totally” dropped. But it is not true if interpreted to mean that he was some how declared innocent. The situation is confusing. Clarity would demand that either North is somehow shown innocent by remov ing the suspicion of wrongdoing or that he is found guilty and punished. At this point it seems that such a solution is out of reach. It may be that the only way this story will receive something like a clear ending is if North is guilty. If he is innocent, he probably will write a book saying so, and the book will be discounted by those convinced of his guilt. If, however, North is guilty, he can confess. Of course, for the most part, confession of wrongdoing is non existent in politics. Sometimes a poli tician will admit to a “mistake.” But a mistake doesn’t have moral signifi cance. A mistake is fohat one some times makes when trying to add a column of numbers. If North has done wrong, he should confess and repent. This would not mean necessarily that justice had been satisfied. But then, perhaps, at least for some, the story could be brought to an end through grace. Reiter is a grad uate student in philosophy and a Daily Nebraskan columnist. It is aha unclear that the case shows whether reform in the government is needed. We didn’t need, the. North trial to know that govern ment officials should not break the law. I-EDITORIAL POLICY-1 Signed staff editorials represent the official policy of the Fall 1991 Daily Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Editorial Board. Its members are: Jana Pedersen, editor, Eric Pfanner, editorial page editor, Diane Brayton, managing editor, Walter Gholson, columnist; Paul Domeier, copy desk chief; Brian Shellito, cartoonist; Mi chael Stock, columnist. Editorials do not necessarily reflect the views of the university, its employees, the students or the NU Board of Regents. Editorial columns represent the opinion of the author. The Daily Nebraskan’s publishers are the re gents, who established the UNL Publications Board to supervise the daily production of the pa per. According to policy set by the regents, respon sibility for the editorial content of the newspapei lies solely in the hands of its students.