Image provided by: University of Nebraska-Lincoln Libraries, Lincoln, NE
About The daily Nebraskan. ([Lincoln, Neb.) 1901-current | View Entire Issue (Jan. 27, 1999)
EDITOR Erin Gibson OPINION EDITOR Cliff Hicks EDITORIAL BOARD Nancy Christensen Brad Davis Sam McKewon Jeff Randall Bret Schulte Our VIEW Back of the bus OPS should rethink ending busing For Omaha, it looks as though a 23 year practice soon may be going out the window. Integration busing, which was forced by a court order upon the Omaha Public Schools in 1976, faces elimination after a proposal last week by Superintendent John Mackiel. Popular opinion in Omaha has been loudly supporting Mackiel’s proposal, and mandatory busing most likely will be a memory by the 1999-2000 school year. The only question that truly remains is whether the intended goals of busing - egalitarian spending and integration for young students - will last after its demise. But regardless of the effects, many parents with children in the public school system have little concern for those results. They see their children being shipped across town to unfamiliar neigh borhoods. Their children get up earlier and come home later to account for the commute time. And, come parent-teacher conference time, they have to cross town themselves. iviacKiei nas sirucK a nerve in Omahans, and that nerve should carry his plan through the school board and into reality. We can only hope that everyone knows what they’re getting themselves into. Putting a stop to integration busing will, as one might suspect at first glance, put a damper on integration in the schools. Despite years of integration rhetoric and peace-and-love speeches, Omaha is still a city with highly visible color lines. Those lines run along streets and are rarely crossed. Without busing, some peo ple may never cross them. For many children, integration busing provides an opportunity to sit in a class room with people they might otherwise never meet. They learn acceptance, toler ance and appreciation for other cultures and socio-economic groups. They learn to be humane. Playing a video of “I Have a Dream” for a room full of 8-year-olds may be edu cational, but it’s not enough. For children who are still young enough to be impres sionable, the positive aspects of integra tion busing can linger for a lifetime. Ending that practice may not have instantly recognizable effects. It may not lower test scores or enrollment figures or even graduation rates. But it will affect the way a lot of children see the world and the people who inhabit it. So when the people of Omaha - as they most definitely will - do approve the end of integration busing, here’s hoping that they realize not only what they might be getting themselves into, but what bus ing got them out of. Editorial Policy Unsigned editorials are the opinions of the Spring 1999 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. Latter 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@unlinfo.unl.edu. Duffys VIEW DN LETTERS A brave move As an easterner who last year visited and lec tured at the UNL cam pus, I was intrigued by the responses to Jessica Flanagain’s article about the lesbian emphasis in women’s studies. When I was first working on the subject of heterophobia - femi nism’s fear of and antag onism toward men and in particular toward hetero sexuality - I posted a query about this subject on a feminist e-mail list. I got back roughly 100 hostile replies, of which about half told me there was no such thing as male-bashing within feminism, and the other half told me men deserved it! I note that the responses to Flanagain’s words reflect the same division, with some respondents saying Flanagain is wrong in her estimate of the high numbers of lesbian writ ers in women’s studies courses, ana oiners defending the disproportionate num bers (which they, by implication, acknowledge). There’s nothing fantastic about Flanagain’s observations. Many femi nist writers and scholars see heterosex uality as the key structure that sustains patriarchy, and therefore as the point to which attacks must be directed. And many heterosexual feminists shy away from even commenting on this aspect of feminism, as if they are indeed ashamed that they are “sleeping with the enemy.” Flanagain is brave to voice a criti cism that she knows will bring a pre dictable response. But she is right; there is indeed a difference between balancing a curriculum and proselytiz ing for a particular political agenda. Many women’s studies programs have long since crossed that line. Daphne Patai professor University of Massachusetts at Amherst Representing... no one? I am repulsed as a white, Republican male student at this univer sity, that there are people in our student senate wno are posing as representa tives of the students. The senate passed an amendment which will be placed on senate Bill 26; the amendment calls for five at-large seats in the senate for students who have historically been, and continue to be, underrepresented at our university. The addition of the seats will ensure that there will be groups represented, that they will receive recognition and that will play active roles in the univer sity. I congratulate the senate and com mend them for passing this bill. Thank you to those who worked so hard on this because it was long overdue. For those of you who opposed the bill, what do you have to lose? The university is pushing for diver sification, but for many who worked on this project and many who were in favor of the amendment: It is not a mat ter of diversification, it is a matter of representation. I was frankly appalled at some of the comments made by “our” senators. Sen. Woodford spoke of representation and the fact that he can represent the students’ interests. He went on to say later in the meeting “Don’t surrender your judgment (as a senator) to the people!” What is a democra cy to you, Senator? You say that you “represent” the students, yet you will not “surrender” your power to them to make a decision! Sen. Paul Schreier proceeded to imply that the students were not intelligent enough to vote on the bill. These people do not represent me! I deem the student body quite intel ligent and more than competent to show where their interests lie, by exercising their responsibility to vote. It is time that we see results from our univer sity student government. ASUN is more than a few people passing cheesy laws that seem irrelevant to our lives as students. There are results coming from ASUN but not without die force of the students behind them. There were four people who spoke in favor of the amendment to Bill 26 in a special lupitd meeting. 1 ne ASUN special topics committee did not recommend the amendment to the senate, even though there was not one person in opposition of the amendment at the meeting. _ The senate meeting Wednesday night proved, once again, the students were crying to be heard out on this issue. Open forum brought nine stu dents to the ASUN meeting; their thoughts were limited to four speakers. The students seated in die back of the Georgian Room in the Nebraska Union, myself one of them, were not being heard and thus not being repre sented! The good news is the amendment was passed, as was senate Bill 26 in its entirety. The students of the University of Nebraska will have the opportunity to represent themselves at the polls. March 3,1999, will prove that the stu dents of this university will be equally and justly represented regardless of senators with narrow minds, regard-, less of senators who are self-centered traditionalists, and regardless of dis ability, sex, orientation, ethnicity or creed! David M. Burns sophomore dietetics and exercise science I I as
