EDITOR
DougKouma
OPINION
EDITOR
Anthony NguyeSn
EDITORIAL
BOARD
Paula Lavigne
Joshua GilHn
Jessica Kennedy
Jeff Randall
Erin Gibson
Our
VIEW
Hotel Lincoln
Benefits to downtown
outweigh inconveniences
The city of Lincoln has a suite deal on
the table.
After years of debating and negotiating
with several prospective developers — in
cluding the University of Nebraska-Lincoln
— Mayor Mike Johanns announced last
Thursday that Block 35 may soon be trans
formed from a 250-space parking lot to a
250-room Embassy Suites Hotel.
The plan, which must be approved by
the City, Council before being finalized,
would provide a much-needed shot in the
arm for downtown Lincoln. Businesses, the
university and the community could benefit
from replacing the lot between 10th and 11th
streets and P and Q streets with a bustling,
upscale hotel.
And while some decry the removal of250
precious parking spaces while the site is un
der construction, the long-term benefits easily
outweigh the short-term inconvenience.
The simple fact of the matter is the devel
opment would add more than just an economic
boost by bringing in convention-goer dollars.
The hotel would enrich the area, revitalizing
what is close to a commercial dead zone be
tween the Lied Center forthe Performing Arts
and the Lincoln Journal Star.
Considerations in constructing the ho
tel include an attractive design, possibly
providing a first-floor marketplace with
shops and restaurants and adding much
needed meeting space for conventions.
And for all those commuters out there,
the plan would most likely include an un
derground^ garage to replace the parking
spaces the hotel would consume.
This, of course, is just speculation for
now. Even if the City Council had approved
the plans for the structure yesterday, con
struction on the hotel may not even begin
until 1998 — a year later than its original
projected starting date.
Between now and then, the need for such
a structure could increase a hundred-fold.
As many businesses slowly inch their way
toward the edges of town, downtown Lin
coln may lose more and more customers,
eventually reaching the levels of destitution
and economic ruin other, larger cities’ down
town areas have fallen to.
Unlikely, but still possible.
A new hotel would give visitors a chance
to stay close to many of the things that make
Lincoln special Imagine the reaction of visi
tors when they learn they will be close to
two major performance centers, more than
half the city's movie theaters, a half-dozen
of the city's fmest restaurants and dozens
of shops, art galleries, businesses and of
fices and the state's largest university.
The Embassy Suites deal offers a bright
scenario for all die parties involved. It would
be difficult to find an agreement that would
benefit the city and the university in such
equal ways in such a short time.
And that should be worth losing a park
ing space for a few months.
Editorial Policy
Unsigned editorials are die opinions of the
Spring 1997 Daily Nebraskan. They do not
necessarily reflect the views of the Univer
sity of Ncbnska-Lincoln, its employees, its
student body or the University of Nebraska
Board of Regents. A column is solely the
opinion of its author The Board of Regents
serves as publisher of the Daily Nebraskan;
policy is set by the Daily Nebraskan Edito
rial Board The UNL Publications Board
established ty die regents, supervises die
production of the papet According to policy
set by the regents, responsibility for the edi
torial content of the newspaper lies solely
in die hands of its student employees.
Letter Policy
The Duly Nebraskan welcomes brief let:
ten to the editor and guest columns, but
does not guarantee their publication. The
Daily Nebraskan retains the right to edit
or reject any material submitted. Sub
mitted material becomes the property of
die Daily Nebraskan and cannot be re
turned. Anonymous submissions will not
be published. Those who submit letters
must identify themselves by name, year
in school, major and/or group affilia
tion, if any. Submit material to: Daily
Nebraskan, 34 Nebraska Union, 1400 R
SL Lincoln, Neb. 68588-0448. E-imit:
letters@unlinfo.unl.edu.
Mehsling’s
VIEW
fr' T> - /. ‘Tv o-• .
i*S -:' «. . * : ■„ ■
WER Was ROCK.W
SIRE OF IT
_
AN\) TO&T Wst£ CONTINUES....
DN
LETTERS
The Humanity
I am writing in response to Brad
Pardee’s “Making a Mountain,”
(DN, Friday) in which Mr. Pardee
accuses Mr. Aguirre of responding
in an inappropriate manner to a
statement in the column “Have
book, will read” by JJ. Harder (DN,
Feb. 12).
I wish to state that I am in total
agreement with Mr. Aguirre’s .
premise that the article contained a
racial slur and age-ist remark, and
that both were totally unnecessary.
Mr. Pardee asks what people who
enter the country illegally should be
called. An accurate term is “undocu
mented worker.” Pardee states that
“most of us have a problem with
people who break the law.”
Amazingly enough, "most of us
do not have a problem with the
economic benefit that undocumented
workers provide this country. And,
no one refuses the over $29 billion
undocumented Mexican immigrants
alone pay in taxes, which is far less
than they receive in social benefits.
I will not discuss herethe subject
of why people from other countries
enter the United States, the condi- "
tions and hardships they endure in
doing so and the advantage others
take of than.
Information on these facts can
easily be found for those who wish
to find them. Must we constantly
separate and blame those who have
had different life experiences from
our own? Are they not within our
common experience of humanity
and deserve to be respected and
treated as such?
If we must discuss what is “legal”
and “illegal” in this situation, let’s
remember St. Teresa’s words, “Hate
the sin, not the sinner.”
Even if one believes that undocu
mented border crossing is unjusti
fied, the denial of education to
undocumented children and xeno
phobic acts against them and their
parents is not justified. Mr. Pardee
strongly distinguishes “legal” and
“illegal” immigration. Unless he is
Native American, the distinction
seems rather ironic.
Weston Crawford
libraries
Matt Haney/DN
Necessarily So
Jessica Kennedy’s column “24-7
365” (DN, Monday) on a parent’s
choice between career or child care
shows her great concern for
children’s welfare, and for that I
commend her. But it must be noted
thatworking is not just a choice, but
a necessity for most parents.
As it has bcen widely publicized
lately, it takes twopaychecks to
handle the householdexpenses that
used to be covered by one. X ‘‘home
office” is a luxury that few parents
needing steady pay and health
insurance can afford, even if their
talents could be utilized by such.
ine suggestion mat single
parents could choose “ane-on-one”
care for a child is unfortunately far
fetched. Infant care for my daughter
at the university's child-care facility
was over $75 a week and I can't
even begin to think what a nanny
would have cost.
What we do need are more and
better child-care facilities, more
child-care subsidies for the working
poor, workplaces with flexible and
family-friendly policies and more
men sharing the wok of raising
children.
I do absolutely agree with Ms.
Kennedy that children need lots of
attention, caring and creative and
intellectual stimulation, especially
*
from t^eir parents and/or extended
family. But it is possible to raise
healthy, well-adjusted children and
also work full time.
Victoria Kovar
Lincoln
Not Big Brother
Kevin Gregorious’ letter in
Tuesday’s DN, “1984 in ’97,”
expressing his opposition to allow
ing easier implementation of the
death penalty for cop killers should
not be allowed to go without
challenge.
Gregorious writes that this is
another symbol of “the stranglehold
of an ever growing police state upon
our democratic society.” What he
fails to mention is that the LB in
LB422 and LB744 stands for
legislative bill. This means that
these bills are being proposed by our
democratic society, not being
imposed upon it.
The men and women who have
sworn to protect our society deserve
our respect, not our scorn. Our law
enforcement officers have volun
teered their lives toward protecting
ours. The killing of a cop is an
affront to all we stand for as a
society, and thus we hdve decided it
should be met with the ultimate
penalty. --
Gregorious argues that these bills
value a cop's life more highly than
others. While he says this is bad, I
believe that it is the only way of
showing our disgust at the killing of
a person who is trying to protect
society. Those who kill cops strike
out against our entire society and
deserve to be met with in the
harshest way possible.
Gregorious argues that passage of
these bills will lead to a police state.
I argue that failing to pass these bills
is merely another step on our trip to
a lawless, anarchical society.
Chad Pekroi
senior
political srience/economics
