Opinion
Jana Pedersen, Editor, 472-1766
Alan Phelps, Opinion Page Editor
Kara Wells, Managing Editor
Roger Price, Wire Editor
Wendy Navratil, Copy Desk Chief
Brian Shellito, Cartoonist
Jeremy Fitzpatrick, Senior Reporter
Cut all the manure
President’s hit list too thin to matter
As Congress gears up to run another budget deficit in the
hundreds of billions of dollars, President Bush has been
watchdogging the prickly pear people.
Prickly pear research — $100,000 worth — is one of a hit
list of projects Bush recently released as a group of rescissions
he would like to see in the budget for fiscal year 1992. Alto
gether, Bush proposed $3.6 billion of wide-ranging cuts.
To understand the nature of this list, it should be divided
into two categories. Of the 68 programs identified, 66 together
make up less than 10 percent of the total the rescissions would
save. The other two make up 90 percent of the savings.
Far and away the largest savings would come from the pre
viously announced axing of two Seawolf nuclear submarines
costing $2.8 billion. Another $547.7 million chunk comes from
funds allocated for new public housing construction.
The remainder of the cuts includes a variety of smaller pro
grams from around the country, some of which appear to have
Konn phnertn Knpoiicn tbm; minBt p/mimH fonlit-h In %/ntAre anH
others that don’t appear to have been chosen for any particular
reason.
The Washington Post reported that, according to Republican
congressional aides, many of the projects were recommended
for the chopping block because they were not originally
authorized “under normally applicable requirements.”
Apparently, the other billions upon billions of deficit dollars
were authorized according to the “requirements.”
The list does contain a smattering of decidedly silly pro
grams. Lowbrush blueberry research, vidalia onion storage,
manure disposal and similar projects were each budgeted
hundreds of thousands of dollars.
However, why other programs were included on the hit list
is unknown. James Merchant, an associate professor with the
UNL Conservation and Survey Division, said the projects, such
as a water study he is involved with, had little in common with
each other.
There is one thread that ties the list together: Except for the
defense and housing cuts, none of these nroiccts amounts to
anything in the big scheme of things. One B-2 bomber costs
more than 90 percent of these projects put together.
Some voters may gel a kick out of this “crusade,” but the
pork the president picked is but a tiny collection of minuscule
hams in a giant barrel. Election-year politicking won’t help the
budget deficit.
Office of Management and Budget Director Richard Darman
said a longer list of more rescissions will follow the first. If it’s
just more of the same, the list will barely be worth the govern
ment funds the Administration will use to publicize it.
Bush should be spending his time coming up with a logical,
comprehensive plan — not sticking his nose in prickly pears
tuiu iiianuiV/. |
Homosexuals face prejudices
I would like to thank Mall
McDonald for the informative edito
rial he wrote on Wednesday (“Liberal
ignorance resurfaces,” DR, April 1).
I had heard that sodomy was ille
gal, but I did not realize that law had
Been so recently tested and constitu
tionally verified by a Supreme Court
decision (Bowers v. Harwick, 1986).
I am glad that this fact was published
because most people arc unaware of
the extent of the prejudice that homo
sexuals face. A lot of people think
that homosexuals only have to deal
with hostile, ignorant individuals who
call them names and beat them up
unprovoked. However, you have il
lustrated that the prejudice against
homosexuals even infiltrates our laws.
As you pointed out, under the law,
male homosexuals who have known
each other for years and who love
each other deeply enough to daily
face prejudice and persecution as a
result of that love, these men still do
not have the right to copulate. How
ever, under the law, two willing hetero
sexuals who just met at a party do
have the right to have a one-night
stand if they wish. They are not even
required to have any tests done first to
check for AIDS or STDs.
The legal system, as it now stands,
reminds me of a past lime when,
under the law, even ihc most abusive,
prejudiced w hile men had the right to
vote, but women and blacks did not.
I am also impressed with the fact
that you uphold such high morals and
do not smoke, drink or speed. You
remind me of some very religious
pharisees who, in the time of Jesus,
used to accuse Jesus of sinning by
committing loving acts of healing on
the Sabbath, which was, of course,
against their religious law.
Finally, I want to commend you
for gearing your future to fix the
problems that you sec in society
However, you weren’t very specific
in how you will do that. Do you do ii
in the way that Jesus used to? He used
to hang out with “sinners and tax
gatherers,” eating and drinking witf
them, and showing them love anc
compassion. Do you also socialize
with those you view as immoral? Dc
you visit gay bars or volunteer tc
minister to AIDS victims?
One final question, what sort oi
social problems arise when an undis
eased man who is in love with anolhci
undiscascd man, places his penis intc
the other’s anus in the privacy of thcii
own home?
Jery Sanon
Lincoli
-EDITORIAL POLICY—
Staff editorials represent the olti- aesK cmci; orian anciuio, cariuuii
cial policy of the Spring 1992 Daily ist; Jeremy Fitzpatrick, senior re
Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily- porter.
Nebraskan Editorial Board. Its mem
bers are: Jana Pedersen, editor; Alan According to policy set by the rc
Phclps, opinion page editor; Kara gents, responsibility for the editorial
Wells, managing editor; Roger Price, content of the newspaper lies solely
wire editor; Wendy Navralil, copy in the hands of its students.
IlillfllHIBI illl i l I
i a _ ' /rs/
PAUL SOUPERS
Politicians should end nastiness
Political nastiness is reaching
an all-time high in Washing
ton (D.C., that is, not the state,
which is far too flaky to breed mutant
armies of nasty politicians).
Hot on the heels of the congres
sional check-bouncing, post office and
stealing-candy-from-babies scandals
comes a House of Representatives’
inquiry into White House travel ex
penses.
Apparently, the best-traveled presi
dent since we’ve started having presi
dents is unable to account for the
source of all his travel money. If it
takes $50,000 an hour to operate the
presidential jet Air Force One, why is
George Bush’s total AF1 flight budget
a mere S29,000? For pocket change
like $29,000 a year, I’d expect the
president to be flying back in the
sardine scats with me.
Actually, sending the commander
in chief out in coach class isn’t such a
bad idea. It would be great for George’s
apparent lack of identification with
“the little guy” (i.c. non-millionaires).
After all, the bom-wealthy Bush proba
bly never has flown anything but first
class, even in his pre-political in
idiicy.
What a photo opportunity! If Mr.
Bush can’t run down to the local mall
to fetch a pair of socks without selling
up a major media event, think what
great publicity riding nine hours shoul
dcr-to-shouldcr with a 300-pound
skunk farmer and his sniffly, non
potty-trained two-year-old would
bring.
Of course, the head exec of the
world’s richest nation can look for
ward to his complimentary snack of a
teeny handful of unsaltcd peanuts and
his dinner choice of either baked tuna
l souffle or mcatloaf almondine.
And all of this free national press
, would come with massive savings for
> the average taxpayer, who will no
longer need to shell out annual execu
■ live travel bills in the neighborhood
of tens of millions of dollars. That’s a
• pretty nice neighborhood — the kind
» of neighborhood where presidential
* aides getchauffeured limousine rides
to work every day.
i Speaker of the House Tom Foley
i claims the inquiry is aimed only at
finding where the money actually docs
come from (probably military and
Actually, sending
the commander in
chief out in coach
class isn’t such a
bad idea. It would
b£. great for
George's apparent
lack of identification
mth ‘ the little guy”
(i.e. non-million
aires).
secret service budgets) and why Whitt
House accounts don’t reflect tht
expense.
Foley says he’s not interested ir
why the money is spent the way it i<
;m<l lhaf ihp innnirv hut hppn in ths
works for months. But it couldn’
have come at a more politically expe
dient time, what with the scandal-of
the-week (something about the pos
office, I think) rocking Capitol Hill.
But this is also the White House’*
response, to blame Congressiona
Democrats for one impropriety 01
another, to vehemently deny every
thing and to pass the whole mess ofi
onto Democratic political game-play
ing. Not coincidentally, it is also the
White House line on every exccutivt
failure (the annual budget wrestling
match comes to mind here) to gel«
little frothy-mouthed and rant abou
the Demos on the Hill.
George Bush just can’t stand i
when he can’t get his way, and it’sal
the Democrats’ fault.
My big question is, if the money’;
all legit, but just spread out all over
what’s the big deal? Why all the stink
It seems to me to be just another
incident in a long line of political
maneuvers aimed mostly at making
someone else look bad.
I’d like to see George Bush come
out and say something like, “Sure,
Tom, come on over and check the
books. We’ll work this out.” Instead,
the American public is treated to
another intragovemment trench war
along the party battle lines.
And in election years, that war
spills over to intraparty battles. In the
latest Brown/Clinton debate, Jerry
Brown became vindictive and more
than a little rude (even interrupting
the moderator) trying to respond to
Clinton’s assertion that the Brown
“flat tax rate’’ plan would fail to till
out the budget.
At least I think that’s why Jerry got
so mad; I even watched the debate,
nearly in its entirety, and would have
trouble saying what set him off.
Clinton’snumbers just breezed by,
a blur of statistics muttered in anger
in the space of about 10 seconds, but
it was enough to make Gov. Moon
beam hot under the collar.
Clinton, too, had his little eruption
last week, blowing up at his naysay
ers in an impromptu explosion. He’d
had enough, by gum, and he wasn’t
going to take anymore,
i To all these politicos, regardless
of party affiliation, whocan’t take the »
irritation oi scrutiny anu puunv.
; quiry, I can only offer the advice: II
you can’t stand the heal, get out of the
kitchen.
The entire Brown/Clinton vendetta
seems to be especially nasty for a
primary election. Usually we don t
see this kind of poison until the gen
eral election, probably because can
didates in the same party arc sup
r posed to be on the same side.
I’d even venture to say that politi*
: cians in the same government
t regardless of party affiliation — should
; be more or less on the same side. The
i side of the “general good,’’ of pros
t perity and freedom, etc.
But of course that’s more than a
l little optimistic. Given the sad state
I of national politics these days, I m
ama/cd the revolution hasn’t started
i yet.
• Souders is a junior English major and a
? Daily Nebraskan columnist.
-LETTER POLICY
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes
brief letters to the editor from all
readers and interested others.
Letters will be selected for publi
cation on the basis of clarity, origi
nality, timeliness and space avail
able. The Daily Nebraskan retains
the right to edit or reject all material
submitted.
Anonymous submissions will not
be considered for publication. Let
ters should include the author’s
name, year in school, major and
group affiliation, if any. Requests to
withhold names will not be granted.
Submit material to the Daily Ne
braskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R
St., Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
