-*s
EDITOR
Erin Gibson
OPINION
EDITOR
Cliff Hicks
EDITORIAL
BOARD
Nancy Christensen
Brad Davis
Sam McKewon
Jeff Randall
Bret Schulte
i
Our
VIEW
Social
insecurity
Address debt dilemma
before it s too late
It seems that Congress has learned from its
Social Security crisis of the early 1980s.
Then, Social Security was a few months
away from defaulting on its funds to the
American people and being forced to borrow
from Medicare’s trust fund.
The problems that will be addressed at a
two-day Social Security conference, which
begins today, aren’t nearly as pressing.
Economists estimate that the fund will run out
of money in the year 2032, when the Baby
Boomer generation will be in its twilight
vears.
Still, it makes sense to address the problem
now, when it will be less expensive and less of
a responsibility for the American people to
shoulder. The economy is strong now, and
because President Clinton is not up for re
election, he can concentrate on actual reform
rather than posturing for voters.
Exactly what the proper solution is for
solving the Social Security dilemma is a more
complicated question. Clinton himself has
neither devised nor supported any particular
plan, making it difficult for Democrats and
Republicans to mobilize for or against a cause.
It is unlikely that most in Congress would
risk supporting raising the age at which the
elderly are eligible for Social Security bene
fits. Such a policy hurts minorities, whose
average life expectancy is lower than that of
whites. The policy has been considered politi
cally damaging. The same could be said for
taking more money from Americans than
already is taken.
The plan that will be given the closest look
is that of privatization of the Social Security
system. One policy calls for the mandatory
set-up of a Social Security fund for each indi
vidual family, which, in turn, would jnvest that
fund into a choice of market stocks or govern
ment bonds.
r>-ui: ,— .1_i ;
1UY U1V iXiJ Uig, it Will
pay dividends for both the recipients of Social
Security and the economy, which would
receive the extra investment from millions of
households. Another plan is similar, but puts
the investment responsibility in a government
organization rather than the individual.
The plan has drawn criticism from the
labor unions and liberal Democrats, who
claim that privatizing the Social Security Act
would only serve the Wall Street firms that
controlled it. Furthermore, the results could be
catastrophic for those who invest during a
period of recession. Some say the plan leaves
too much up to investment know-how, which,
if those who needed Social Security had, they
probably wouldn’t need Social Security.
While the solution is sure to be a compro
mise and may include privatization of some
sort, it’s good that the government is address
ing the problem now. Better that than waiting
until our generation is looking at an empty
cookie jar that we once helped to fill.
Editorial Policy
Unsigned editorials are the opinions of
the Fall 1998 Daily Nebraskan. They do
not necessarily reflect the views of the
University of Nebraska-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 Editorial Board. The
UNL Publications Board, established by
the regents, supervises the production
of the paper. According to policy set by
the regents, responsibility for the editorial
content of the newspaper lies solely in
the hands of its student employees.
letter Policy
The Daily Nebraskan welcomes brief
letters 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.
Submitted material becomes property of
the Daily Nebraskan and cannot be
returned. Anonymous submissions will
not be published. Those who submit
letters must identify themselves by name,
year in school, major and/or group
affiliation, if any.
Submit material to: Daily Nebraskan, 34
Nebraska Union, 1400 R St. Lincoln,
NE. 68588-0448. E-mail:
letters@unKnfo.unl.edu.
Mook’s
VIEW
|r"“ 1 'y~ *\
i Hint L=/ » ifw v
: m id m. m m.
I i mm iMKUUfl* :
BUSKS W. '
m ®r % m. f
Sex stinks
In response to Josh Wimmer’s arti
cle, “Star city sex industry” (Friday)
Let me ask you this, Josh. Let’s say the
powers that be legalize prostitution.
How would you feel if your daughter
wished to join this most “honorable”
profession? Or your sister? Or your
girlfriend? Brother? Best friend? I
won’t bother with the rest of your
ridiculous points. Fortunately for
Lincoln, people like you are a minority.
Brian O’Grady
Library Technician I
With or without honors
I have a confession to make. I am a
non-honors student living in Neihardt,
the honors dorm. Don’t worry, I’m not
the only one. In fact, there are a fair
number of us non-honors people living
here. However, it seems as if that will
be changing within the next year or so.
You see, on Friday, I received in my
mailbox a letter from Ana Campos, our
residence director here, which stated
all kinds of new guidelines for living in
Neihardt. Apparently it came about
rrom me nonors program s promismg
all incoming freshmen honors students
a room in Neihardt. When they were
unable to live up to their promise, they
saw the need to change something, and
put out this letter.
Mostly it just said that there will be
fewer single rooms next year, and if
people want to move to other dorms,
they will be given priority assignment
to wherever they want. However, as I
went on to read die back of the letter, it
began to talk about non-honors resi
dents.
It had three things to say about us:
First, we would get priority assignment
to rooms in other dorms for the 1999
2000 school year. Second, we could
continue living in Neihardt for the
1999-2000 school year. After that,
however, we will have to move
out. Lastly, if any nomhonors stu- ro
dent is living with an honors stu- V
dent, and they want to continue y /
living together, they both will X/
have to move out. This seems like '<J
blatant discrimination to me.
After receiving countless uni- j
versity mailings with the little ^
“UNL does not discriminate \ 1
against gender, race, etc.,” I would j
think this sort of thing would not go j
unnoticed. It almost seems as if j
they are trying their hardest iu / J
make the honors dorm as exclu- /:
sive as possible by kicking out
residents that aren’t good Jjjfer
enough for them. And
DN
LETTERS
with the construction of another hon
ors dorm beginning soon, I would
think they would have plenty of hous
ing in the near future.
It all just seems very wrong to me,
and I can’t believe the honors program
would go so far as to kick people out of
their homes just to make themselves
more exclusive from the rest of cam
pus.
Cory Lueninghoener
sophomore
computer engineering
Rutgers 0000
In response to the Daily
Nebraskan’s Dec. 3 (Thursday) article
concerning “Rutgers 1000,” I would
like to praise the University of
Nebraska and at the same time express
my concern of thoughtlessness of the
Rutgers group.
In this diverse world, a critical part
of a young person’s education should
include openmindedness. I find it
rather sad that a group that is so sup
portive of a quality education can be so
close-minded that it cannot recognize
the opportunities and lessons in life
that serious collegiate athletics have to
offer young people who are pursuing
their dreams.
I am a very serious student and
track athlete at UNL, and if it were not
for my hard work, the help and support
of many highly respected individuals,
and athletic programs, I may not be
receiving the quality education that I
am at UNL.
1
[attHaney/DN ^ ~
dents have their options of how they
can pay the high expenses of educa
tion, and I have made the choice of
doing this with the hardest work that I
can imagine putting myself through.
Sometimes I do think that there must
be an easier way to pay for school than
earning my scholarship, but then I
think of my dreams as an athlete and
the fact that I have this great opportu
nity to achieve them. Besides, the
harder I work, the more determined I
am to get my effort’s worth in the class
room.
Rutgers English Professor William
Dowling said, “Nebraska places no
emphasis on academics. The whole
attention of the state is on 40 steroid
pumped non-students.”
From this Nebraska student-ath
lete’s point of view, this statement,
among others, seems very uninformed
and is extremely insulting. I’m sure
that other student athletes here would
say the same.
it s extremely distasteful and even
pathetic that the Rutgers group makes
assumptions like this when it obvi
ously has not done its research. I real
ize that from an outsider’s point of
view, like that of the Rutgers group, it
would seem that athletics here do get
more attention than academics. They
do not realize that if this is true, the
imbalance of attention only reaches as
far as the public eye. Which is a more
appropriate objective here, focusing on
public opinion or education? UNL ha^
clearly made the right choice - educa
tion, of course.
If the Rutgers group feels the need
to badmouth other schools because
they think their athletics smother their
academics, they had better do their
research first. They sure have run their
mouths with some very serious, but
uniformed, accusations. Athletes at
UNL work very hard at their sports and
in the classroom, and this school
makes it worth our efforts with the
'education it provides. I would know
this, and “Rutgers 1000” has no clue
what it is talking about,
y In closing, I would like to say
y this: Thank you, UNL, for helping
\ me pursue a great education, a suc
/ cessful career in my future and my
V~\ athletic goals as well. I also
f thank you for not making it
■cjfjpr easy and for continuing your
jlT. dedication to excellence
I; I despite obstacles like the sorry
is of Rutgers 1000. Go Big
Tony Smith
junior
geography
