xt78pk070r7h https://exploreuk.uky.edu/dips/xt78pk070r7h/data/mets.xml The Kentucky Kernel Kentucky -- Lexington The Kentucky Kernel 1974-11-07 Earlier Titles: Idea of University of Kentucky, The State College Cadet newspapers  English   Contact the Special Collections Research Center for information regarding rights and use of this collection. The Kentucky Kernel  The Kentucky Kernel, November 07, 1974 text The Kentucky Kernel, November 07, 1974 1974 1974-11-07 2020 true xt78pk070r7h section xt78pk070r7h Thursday, November 7, 1974

EN TUCKY

Ker

an independent student newspaper

SG argues for permission
to name committee members

By BRUCE WING-ES
Kernel Staff Writer

Argument for the acceptance of a proposed
revision giving Student Government (SG) the
power to appoint students to University
committees was heard by the Student (‘ode
Revision Committee Wednesday.

The committee also heard arguments for and
against adding the word intent to some offenses
listed in the student code and commentary on the
Buckley amendment as it applies to the
l'niversity.

THE (“ODE of Student (‘onduct deals with
rules. procedures. rights and responsibilities
governing non-academic offenses against the
l' niversity.

Each year the Advisory Committee on Student
(‘ode Revision—composed of students.
administra tors and faculty . solicits proposed
student code changes and holds an open hearing
for the l'niversity community to discuss the

proposed changes. This year 34 changes in the
present student code were submitted.

This yea r‘s hearing was held on two sessions —
one from 3-5 pm . and the other from 7-9 pm. The
hearing was attended by five persons.

THE COMMITTEE will now consider which '
proposed changes will be forwarded to President _
Otis A. Singletary for presentation to the Board
of Trustees. The Board Of Trustees is the only
body that can amend the student code.

David Mucci. SG president, spoke in favor of a

21 University of Kentucky

Lexington. Ky. 40506

M}

proposed change in section 7.11 of the student “ * .

code. This section now states that the president
of the University shall determine who will serve _
on the student code revision committee.

l’nder the proposed change. students serving 1

on the committee would be appointed by SC. “SC
shouki be charged with this (appointment of
student members to the committee) because it is
the official body in student matters according to
the goveming regulations." Mucci said.

John Darsie. University legal counsel and committee member. and Dr.
Robert Zumwinkle. vice president for student affairs and committee
chairman. discuss one of the 34 proposed changes in the student code
during the Student (‘ode Revision (‘ommittee's open hearing Wednesday.
Only five people attended the hearing.

Students protest School Board's free speech policy

By Sl'SAN JONES
Kernel Staff Writer

Several UK students strongly protested
what they termed the unofficial policy of
the Fayette County School Board to
prevent the discussion of homosexual
lifestyles within the schools at the board‘s
meeting Wednesday afternoon.

“Myself and other students have been
prevented from discussing our lifestyles
by teachers who feared the loss of their
jobs if they permitted unhampered, open
exchange on controversial topics.“ said
Carey Jurkin, a UK freshman and
graduate of Tates Creek High School.

“THIS LACK of exposure to several
sides of controverisal issues has limited
the usefulness of our education Outside the

These sorority and fraternity members are busy
preparing a float for tonight's homecoming
“(‘Iay

Getting Ready

parade.

confines of the sheltered world of high
school,“ he said.

Two Lexington high schools recently
denied gay speakers. who had been invited
by teachers or students, the right to speak
on honosexuality in the classrooms.

“Furthermore," Junkin said.
“homosexual students and faculty within
the Fayette County school system are
subjected to daily harrassment.
ostracism. verbal and physical abuse
when it is even suspected that the person
has homosexual inclinations."

JAMES HARLOW. chairman of the
board of education, told Junkin that he
should submit a written request to the
board for a reconsideration of its policy.

Another board member, James

“.1

”kernel no" photo by Phil Groshon!

The float is entitled

('ompromised—(‘urci’s (‘ats Conquer."

Broadus. pointed out Junkin was asking
the board to really respond to his
statement.

“This policy isa result of the history and
evolution of the values of our way of life,"
Broadus said. “There is increasing
concern with the fact that the schools have
not adequately dealt with sexuality."

BROADUS ADDED he felt the policy
shouki be reviewed.

Wayne Davis. chairman of the free
speech committee of the Kentucky Civil
Liberties Union (KCLU), supported the
students in their demands for freedom to
speak in the schools.

“We recognize that in high schools not
every subject can be discussed by
everyme," Davis said. “But we are
concerned that a person was turned away

because this topic was not considered
acceptable by the school system.“

DAVlS SAID KCLU might file suit
against the Fayette County School Syshem
if something’can‘t be worked out with the
principals and the Board of Education. “It
is not in the best interest of this school
system to deny students the right to
discuss contraversial topics.” he said.

Lafayette High School history teacher
Lons Points said the present policy,which
requires that all speakers brought into the
schools be approved by the principal.
places her under extreme limitation.

“Non-controversial speakers
admitted, while ocntroversial ones
aren‘t," Points said. “I feel I am
personally able to make decisions about
speakers."

are

Proposed merger gets
unfavorable reception

By LYN HACKER
Kernel Staff Writer

The chance of the College of Library
Science merging with the School of
Communications deserves a lot more
consideration, James D. Sodt, assistant to
the Dean of Library Science said.

Sodt said they were not very optimistic
that things would work out. Therefore, the
Library Science facutly is unanimously
opposed to the merger proposal.

THE SCHOOL of Communications,
recently in a school reorganization
meeting, were more concerned with when
and if the reorganization proposal would
be passed. Lewis Donohue. director. said.

“At the time it was proposed. the faculty
metand expressed opposition to the plan,"
Donohue said.

“We’vejust gone through reorganization
and the faculty saw it as requiring more
time spent in reorganizing. Since then
there has been no formal expression but
the opposition has moderated somewhat,"
he said.

SODT SAID there were several
considerations why the library science
faculty did not want a merger.

“One of the things we are concerned
with is the accreditation," Sodt said. ”The
accreditation board is sensitive to the
autonomy question. and the faculty is
concerned library science would lose it in a
merger," he said.

Sodt also said there would be substantial
costs in merging the two units, and used
the transferring of student records as an
example.

ANOTHER EXAMPLE was the load on
advisors. “We have very few
undergraduates in library science. We are
a graduate program. We take our advising
very seriously because our students will
only be here two years." he said.

The School of Communications had been
worried about losing the liberal arts thrust
associated with the College of Arts and
Sciences.

“But we have been advised that is not
necessarily the case, that we would
continue to offer liberal arts programs as
well as professional programs," Donohue
said.

"AT THE moment the school faculty is
just weary of the tentative nature of things
and would like to have some kind of

(‘ontinued on page l2

 

   
   
       
  
   
  
  
   
  
   
   
  
  
  
    
   
  
    
   
   

Edim-incniot, Linda Carnos
Managing “tor. PM! Mitchell
Associate editor. NIMV Duly
Editorial page editor, Dan Crutcner

‘— ‘~

Features editor, Larrv Mead
Arts editor, Greg Notetich
Sports editor. Jim Mauon’
Pnotoorapnv editor. Ed Gerald

  

Editorials rqreunt in opinions ot the editors. not the University I
I

'Simon says,’ and business steps forward

Simon says, “Go forth big
business“ and big business dutifully
takes another step forward, crushing
consumers and the American
landscape beneath its heavy frame of
soaring prices, rising unemployment
and environmental rape.

The Oct. 31 resignation of former
energy czar John Sawhill indicates
that the Ford administration will
continue its economic games with
Secretary of the Treasury William
Simon and Andrew E. Gibson,
Sawhill’s replacement, calling the
next moves.

Sawhill, one of the few members of
the Ford inner circle of economic
advisors who exhibited any tendency
to balance the problems of energy
development with consumer and
environmental protection, resigned

after he came under increasing
pressure from Ford and other high
administration officials to soften
many of his hard-line stands against
the corporate empires. Although
Sawhill’s proposals could be
considered only moderate, they were
obviously too much to take for the
“wait and see" course charted by
Ford.

Sawhill roasted under
administration fire primarily for his
attempt to initiate a significantly
higher federal gasoline tax to
decrease consumption and thereby
break the diplomatic stranglehold
employed the Arab oil cartel. Also,
Sawhill’s call for a $5.25 per barrel
ceiling on oil obtained from retapped
wells caused turmoil among Ford’s
advisors. Finally, the former energy
chief’s concern for the environment

conflicted with many of his industry—
minded associates.

Certainly Sawhill was not without
fault in his capacity as federal energy
administrator. He backed high profits
for oil companies to stimulate new
development and increased
production. He also appeared at times
to vacillate between approaches to
energy problems. Still, his efforts to
lessen U.S. dependency on Arab oil
were sound.

It is doubtful that Gibson will be
quite as dynamic in his labors to curb
the influence of international oil
concerns. Gibson was appointed by
former President Nixon four years
ago to lobby for federal subsidies for
American shipbuilders. He resigned
his position as an executive in a
company that built and leased oil
tankers only about six months ago.

Gibson‘s background is hardly
conducive to any vigorous opposition
to corporate interests.

While Gibson’s record does not
promote much optimism in the
consumer ranks, it certainly is in line
with the policies of the Ford
administration. The hands-off
attitude disguised under the theme of
volunteerism in energy consumption
did not mesh with Sawhill‘s views.
Gibson is better suited to implement
President Ford‘s recently stated
intention to relax environmental
standards in order to stimulate
corporate pmduction.

While the Ford administration
continues to play games, the nation is
faced with a dilemma that can hardly
be described as fun. When Simon says
one step forward for business it
usually turns out to be two steps
backward for the country.

 

    
     
    
  
     
    
   
  
  
     
     
    
    
    
     
    
   
      
    
     
 
  
      
   
  
     
      
    
  
 
   
 
 
  
  
 
  
 
  
    
  
 
 
 
 
 

Nicholas Von Hoffman

Either change pension system or breed slaves

By NICHOLAS VON HOFFMAN

WASHINGTON — President
Ford has been on the stump
warning of the dangers of a
veto~proof Congress and the
possibility of a legislative tyran-
ny, a condition that existed only
once in our history for a few
years after the Civil War. The
truth, should the President care
to acknowledge it, is that in our
uni-party society we already
have a veto-proof Congress on
issues of large importance and
little publicity.

Not long ago, for instance, Mr.
Ford wisely vetoed a bill that
creates a $7 billion Federal
obligation to pay railroad work-
ers’ pensions. The Senate over-
rode the veto 72 to 1 and the
House did so 360 to 12.

IT IS NOW law, although
nobody has any idea of how the
government is going to meet this
obligation. Indeed this small act
of legislative tyranny received so
little attention that most people

. probably aren’t aware of it, and
few of those who are appreciate
that this promise to pay isn’t
reflected in the ordinary figures
released on government debt.

If this were the only obligation
of its kind, we could live with it.
Who wants to begrudge a
dignified retirement to men
who've worked in cold, heat and
danger? The same perhaps can
be said of the beneficiaries of the
Tax Court Judges Survivors
Annuity Fund, a group currently
composed of two undoubtedly
deserving widows.

Inflated Promises

But, we have to look at the
accumulated, aggregate liabili-
ties we've assumed from all these
Federal employee pensions and
related promises to pay. At the
present time it works out to
something over $200 billion. On
top of that we must face the
consequences of having agreed to
pay the future beneficiaries of the
Social Security System a sum
now estimated to be just a bit off

$2 trillion, 100 billion. As of now
we don’t know where a nickel of
that money's coming from.

THAT TAKES care of the IOUs
issued in Washington, but there's
an estimated additional $200
billion in obligations contracted
by state and local governments.
A recent issue of Business Week
magazine contains a quote from a
Federal official saying that state
and local governments “have
promised half