Daily
Nebraskan
Ecfitorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
JeffZeleny.....Editor. 472-1766
Jeff Robb.Managing Editor
Matt Woody.. Opinion Page Editor
DeDra Janssen.Associate News Editor
Rainbow Rowell..Arts & Entertainment Editor
James Mehsling.Cartoonist
Chris Hain.Senior Reporter
Vote LETTUCE
Fat-free platform offers meaty plans
Four choices can make for a difficult decision, but that’s not the
case in this year’s ASUN election.
Clearly, in this campaign there are two parties of words — IM
PACT and ACCESS — and two parties of action — CUT COST
and LETTUCE.
Students do not need empty promises from student government;
they need ASUN to work for them.
LETTUCE is the party that will do that, and the Daily Nebras
kan endorses its candidates in this election.
Last year, LETTUCE was a joke. But this year the group is seri
ous about the election and about student government. It is a full
blown party and has quality candidates running for the ASUN Sen
ate and college advisory boards.
The members of the LETTUCE party seem sincere when they
say they will represent students of the University of Nebraska-Lin
coln.
It’s the party’s realistic attitude that makes them believable.
ASUN cannot change the world. In many cases, it can’t even
change things at UNL. LETTUCE’S Brian Fitzgerald, Andy Smith
and Matt Kissler realize this and want to work within the means
available to them to accomplish their goals.
Despite its name, the IMPACT party is the least likely to make
one. IMPACT represents the status quo and the negative feelings
that many students harbor about ASUN: that its members don’t care
about their constituents, that its members are only trying to pad
their resumes and that it is a joke.
ASUN should not be a joke.
Indeed, IMPACT presidential candidate Shawntell Hurtgen has
experience in ASUN. She has followed the ASUN playbook to the
letter, but it is time for that manual to be rewritten from the days of
VISION, VOICE and COMMIT.
ACCESS represents a segment of UNL students that have long
been underrepresented by ASUN. Its all-residence hall ticket could
potentially deliver a huge block of voters, but with only three people
running for the party, it is unlikely to do so.
Mark McGoveran of CUT COST has noble goals, like reducing
UNL administrative paperwork and fighting for students’ rights,
but many of his aims fall beyond the scope of ASUN’s powers.
While his promise to personally argue student’s problems with
professors might provide some entertainment, it is hardly a reason
to vote for him. And students don’t need a public-access television
star for an ASUN president.
It isn’t LETTUCE’S fat-free platform or cheese and crackers that
should win you over. It is their willingness to criticize the stagnant
system of student government.
LETTUCE’S hijinx and gimmicks do not speak poorly of the party.
Again, it has to do with attitude.
In the past, we shouldn’t have let ASUN get away with doing noth
ing, and we can’t let the same happen next year.
ASUN is the voice of UNL students. Until UNL’s student gov
ernment is disbanded, we need to use that voice and make sure it
speaks for us.
LETTUCE is what ACCESS’S Chad Pekron claimed his party
was: the only serious alternative in this campaign.
Editorial policy
Staff editorials represent the official
policy of the Spring 1995. Daily
Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily
Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editori
alsdonotnecessarily reflect the views
of the university, its employees, the
studentsortheNUBoardofRegents.
Editorial columns represent the opin
ion of the author. The regents publish
the Daily Nebraskan. They establish
the UNL Publications Board to su
pervise the daily production of the
paper. According to policy set by the
regents, responsibility for the edito
rial content of the newspaper lies
solely in the hands of its students.
Latter policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the
editor from all readers and interested others. Letters
will be selected for publication on the basis ofclarity,
originality, timeliness and space available. The Daily
Nebraskan retains the right to edit or reject all material
submitted. Readers also are welcome to submit ma
terial as guest opinions. The editor decides whether
material should run as a guest opinion. Letters and
guest opinions sent to the newspaper become the
property of the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be
returned. Anonymous submissions will not be pub
lished. Letters should included 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 Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska
Union, 1400 R St, Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
m Me ^
Of TWfcSE DO vie:
Mi TO STACK?
•'
i
Daily
Nebraskanj
readers say: i
Send your brief letters to:
Daily Nebraskan, 34
Nebraska Union, 1400 R St.,
Lincoln, Neb. 68588. Or fax
to: (402) 472-1761. Letters
must be signed and include a
phone number for
l verification.
Motorcycles
As a student of UNL and a
veteran motorcycle rider, I would
like to voice my opinion on the
subject of charging motorcyclists for
parking.
This is a ridiculous proposal any
way you approach it and I fully
agree with and support die position
of ASUN. I also would like to
present additional points to oppose
the idea of charging a fee to
motorcyclists.
It seems to me that Parking
Services should be more concerned
with alleviating the parking problem
at UNL by encouraging students and
faculty to ride motorcycles, which
are far more space-efficient than
cars. Motorcycles are more efficient
in other ways also: they use less gas,
tires, oil and other fluids, and
therefore expend less resources in
the production and disposal thereof.
On the subject of the permit
itself, any removable device would
invite theft or loss by any of a
number of means, and I would
strongly object to placing any
sticker on my motorcycle. It also
needs to be mentioned that current
motorcycle parking is making use of
areas inaccessible to cars, anyway.
Parking services claims it wants
to be more fair. At what cost? There
aren’t that many motorcycles at
UNL. Would the money generated
support the program? If I am forced
to buy one of these permits for a
given month and that month turns
out to be a cold and rainy one, I will
get my money refunded for the days
that I am unable to ride, right? After
all, fairness is the objective.
David Trail
sophomore
biochemistry
Union expansion
While reading the article “Worth
the money? Students will decide
Wednesday,” I pondered a few
questions about the necessity of a
renovated Nebraska Union and the
unmentioned items surrounding this
debate.
The biggest and most important
question I came up with was “Why
is UNL wanting to spend $11.83
million on the union when we have
other buildings in need of renova
tion? Can we or UNL justify the
WaBatanesamr**'''- .I. jjhw.wm
Bret Gottschall/DN
cost of renovation because it has
represented more than 57 years of
‘unions’ among students, faculty and
the community? Aren’t there
buildings on campus, which serve an
educational purpose, that have
precedence in renovation over the
union?”
If you really want to know who
should decide this issue, go to the
high school students who plan to
attend this university and, even, to
those students who plan to be here
in 1997. These are the scholars who
will have to endure the ever
increasing cost of high education.
I doubt this will occur, but we
need to ask ourselves what has
priority. Apparently, the union is a
place that students can meet, study,
grab a bite to eat or get ripped off at
the University Bookstore.
I propose that UNL go with a
much cheaper plan of necessary
renovation, like improved access for
the physically challenged and the
removal of asbestos. Then, the
university could put the rest into the
renovation of buildings utilized for
classrooms.
Oh, yes! I wonder why the Daily
Nebraskan is so eager to put a huge
article in its paper. Could it be that
its area would be expanded due to
renovation? Take a step back,
evaluate the need and find concrete
reasons for expansion.
Jay Brooke
Senior
Political Science
KwameTure
I was shocked and appalled by
the front-page story on Kwame
Ture, a.k.a. Stokely Carmichael, in
the March 6 Daily Nebraskan.
First off, I couldn’t see how Ture
can be labeled a “rights activist,”
when he touts socialism as the
solution to today’s problems. Like
Marx, Lenin and others, Ture is
wrong.
The socialist, not communist,
system of the former Soviet Union
saw the death of millions because
they refused to be stripped of their
humanity. Socialism has historically
proved to be intolerant of those who
disagree with its principles. Capital
ism, on the other hand, makes it
possible for individuals to express
their diversity .
Contrary to radical belief,
capitalism is not the culprit of racial
tensions, but in fact, crude social
engineering by previous law, such as
segregation, slavery and Jim Crow
laws, is to blame.
There is no way to repay the loss
of dignity that victims of racism
have felt, but the ultimate solution is
toleration. Socialism does not even
consider toleration. Remember,
Nazi Germany was itself a form of
socialism.
Ture’s views are radical and
somewhat understandable, but his
view of turning the tables on racists
will not heal old wounds. The only
way for the United States to
incorporate a tolerant capitalist
society is to rid ourselves of the
socialist programs of welfare,
affirmative action and centralized
banking. This system must also
come through the society wanting it,
and for this to happen, people must
be educated and informed of their
rights.
Christopher A. NoUett
freshman
journalism