1 !
I i
Daily
Nebraskan
Editorial Board
University of Nebraska-Lincoln
JejfZeleny. 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
True justice
Ceiling on punitive damages is wise move
The U.S. House of Representatives Friday dumped coffee in the
lap of the growing histoiy of outrageous punitive-damage awards.
The House passed a legal reform bill that would limit punitive
damages to $250,000 or three times a victim’s monetary losses,
whichever is greater.
Part of the legal reforms contained in the Republican “Contract
With America,” the legislation gives businesses and professionals
a way to put ebb the tide of litigation-mania that has been coming in
to the court system.
Supporters have said the bill would help stymie the flow of per
sonal-injury cases flooding the courts and the potentially crippling
damage awards that go with them.
Opponents fear the legislation would hurt the rights of consum
ers and middle-class citizens.
But in most cases that don’t involve doctors or hospitals, injured
bersons will still be able to recover actual losses such as medical
eosts and missed wages.
Many of the outrageous awards being handed out have nothing
:o do with actual losses and go far beyond justice.
Many of the jurors involved in handing out large punitive-dam
ige settlements are too easily caught up in the emotion and drama
bf human suffering so well staged by today’s trial lawyers.
The easiest way to get rich is to hire a good lawyer, sue some
body and split the winnings. That’s not justice.
Civil litigation should correct neglect or wrongdoing — instead
bf giving people a way to find a pot of gold at the end of a rainbow.
Another view
The latest Gingrich-led Republican initiative on Capitol Hill is
the re-evaluation of a decades-old program that was created to fix a
problem that is centuries old.
Affirmative action programs were started in an attempt to bal
ance minority opportunity with those of mainstream white America.
Unfortunately, the United States has not advanced enough in the
race-relations realm to warrant the ending of those programs. Affir
mative action is ripe for re-evaluation in order to examine its progress
and its most successful methods, but must not be eliminated.
This issue does not call for a blanket law to fix problems. Rather,
conflicts with affirmative actions must be dealt with in a discretion
ary manner based on the dynamics of each individual situation.
Several prominent liberal Democrats have come out supporting re
evaluation of programs, when they once were unconditionally in
favor of them. Even the White House has announced that it has
started reviewing affirmative action programs.
The issue is sure to be a central theme of the upcoming presiden
tial election, but the politicians involved must proceed carefully.
Congress and the White House must ensure the situation is evalu
ated in a realistic light, instead of a political one.
Despite the efforts of affirmative action programs, a deep strati
fication based on race and ethnic groups remains prevalent in
America. The majority of major corporations are controlled by white
males, and a glass ceiling still limits possibilities for minorities.
By removing affirmative action programs, opportunities have little
chance of increasing for minority workers, and a stratified America
will have little chance of balancing out.
— The Daily Collegian,
Penn State University
Editorial policy
Staff editorials represent the official
policy of the Spring 1995. Daily
Nebraskan. Policy is set by the Daily
Nebraskan Editorial Board. Editori
alsdo notnecessarily reflectthe views
of the university, its employees, the
students or the NU Board ofRegents.
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.
Letter policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief letters to the
editor from all readers and interested others. Letters
will be selected forpublication on the basis of clarity,
originality, timeliness and spaceavailable. The Daily
Nebraskan retai ns 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 ran 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 Dot be pub
lished. Letters should included die 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, 34Nebraska
Union, 1400 R St, Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448.
sorry .... wmais back.
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
‘Discrimination’
I am writing this letter to vent
some of the anger that I am feeling
toward the forthcoming career fair.
Many of us graduating seniors were
not informed of this upcoming fair,
for we do not meet the requirements
to attend. This career fair is only for
minorities; “whites need not apply.”
This is outrageous, for if we were
to have a whites-only career fair, it
would be called an act of racism.
I am really sick of this crap. The
university is obviously practicing a
policy of reverse discrimination. For
isn’t the exclusion of a particular
group due to their skin color
racism? Well, that all depends on
who you ask.
Certain races were treated
unjustly for many years and deserve
the same opportunity as the rest of
the community. But how long must
the white society pay for its sins of
the past?
I do not ask for preferential
treatment toward one particular
race. I ask that the playing field be
leveled. I also petition all non
minority readers to attend this career
fair, for it should be academic
merits that are important, not skin
color or gender.
Todd Meedel
senior
management/economics
Advertisements
For the past few weeks, I have
been reading with somewhat
numbed surprise the multitudinous
responses and counter-responses to
the advertisement of Bimbeaux
Video’s “Strip Pool.” 1 must confess
my own surprise at first seeing the
ad, and remarking to myself and
others that “storm clouds are indeed
gathering in the horizon.”
I must also confess my own
perturbations at seeing this adver
tisement in the Daily Nebraskan, but
1 also believe in the free market, so
I, as a reasonably intelligent
individual simply exercise my own
form of self-regulation and continue
on with my reading.
All the while that this quagmire
has been raging, I fear we may have
turned a blind eye to something
equally troubling. I refer to an
advertisement also contained in the
Daily Nebraskan in Section 300 of
the want ads. It reads as follows:
“MALE MODELS For Playgirl and
other National Magazines and
advertisers. Some nudity may be
required. Must be 18-35 with solid
muscle-toned body.”
8*gH
1— "IT.'i ■■ _i
AmySchmidt/DN
Maybe it’s just the fact that I’m a
dumb Republican conservative
ditto-head, but I can’t help but ask
the question that if we are so
offended and upset over women
who choose to drape of undrape
themselves in pursuit of the al
mighty dollar, where is the cry of
“foul” over an advertisement
tempting men to do likewise?
Hmmm?
I will grant you that these
advertisements have distinct
differences, but they both seek the
same outcome. I defy anyone to tell
me that the two women in the “Strip
Pool” ad didn’t answer an identical
advertisement somewhere.
Whether we like it or not, there
are those who will make it their
life’s mission to sell anything people
will be tempted into buying, and
there will be those who oppose
them. I ask you which is the greater
of two evils, to sell a product that
some people consider offensive, or
to make a product that some people
consider offensive?
Daniel L. Howell
graduate student
undeclared
Abortion debate
In response to recent and ongoing
debate on abortion, I felt a few
things needed clarification. Before
the editorial wars began, the Daily
Nebraskan recorded Chris Funk, the
executive director of the Lincoln
chapter of Planned Parenthood, as
having said, “I think we should
require all priests to take History
101. They should be reminded this
is not a theocracy, and this country
has its roots in the separation of
church and state.”
I would like to ask Chris Funk
where in the Constitution it states
that an individual, upon taking up a
religious office, must lay down their
political voice. Her insinuation is
that an individual must sign their
political and moral will over to the
priest or minister before being
admitted to the sanctuary.
Secondly, Planned Parenthood
and other local abortion supporters
are attempting to play on the
public’s sympathy by bringing up
the loss of livelihoods that may be
the result of a pro-life boycott.
Planned Parenthood is again
ignorant of American history.
The boycott is a time-honored
vehicle of democracy and political
change. The boycott was effectively
used during pre-revolutionary
America, to gain suffrage for
women, and during the civil-rights
movement. Pro-abortionists have
even employed boycotts in their
own political agenda.
Suzanne Cimino
sophomore
agronomy
