Newspaper Page Text
The lied and Black. Monday. September 2b. 1 *#77
GREGG STEINLE
Editorials
What is the status of liberty ?
The Red and Black
The future is here
University President Fred C-
Davison has had his way once
again. One of the underlings, one
of those who was supposed to
support him, supposed to be
another of the yes men, dared to
say no. Even worse than that,
this underling, for two years in a
row, won the support of his
faculty members, the same
faculty members who deigned to
disapprove of the president.
Obviously, no university, no
center for higher learning and
the free exchange of ideas, could
have such a person around. Why,
who could imagine such a thing?
Allow a dean who disagreed with
the president to stay on campus
as dean? Have a dean who had
more respect from the faculty
than the president did?
In olden days, anyone who
posed a threat to the king was
put to death. So it is today at the
University of Georgia.
And so John C. Stephens is now
the former dean of the College of
Arts and Sciences. On Aug. 4,
Stephens suddenly developed “a
desire to return to teaching and
research.” For those who have
not been around here very long,
that is University talk for fired.
Stephens’ “resignation” came
as no surprise to close observers
of University politics. As early
as last spring concensus was that
Stephens would not make it
through the summer.
It became clear that Stephens
would have to go last spring,
after the results of the Arts and
Sciences faculty survey showed,
for the second year in a row, that
the majority of the faculty
members responding to the poll
did not think of Davison as an
effective communicator or ad
ministrator.
Stephens, on the other hand,
received good marks from his
faculty members.
Now any normal person,
receiving the dismal kind of
marks that Davison received,
would be upset. But you would
think that the normal person
would see what he could do to
get along better with the faculty
of his largest college. Maybe if
he put forth such an effort now,
next year he might actually
receive better marks from the
faculty. That's what you would
probably think
But not our president. Not
Fred C. Davison. He would not
lower himself to try to come to
better terms with the faculty.
Instead, in a blind rage, he
issued a 172 page memo to all
faculty members stating, in
effect, that the College of Arts
and Sciences would have to be
reorganized “in the immediate
future."
Now, the College of Arts and
Sciences was not going to be
restructured to make it a
happier place for faculty mem
bers to work in. And it wasn't
going to be restructured so that
leners^iielleis
‘ Music
TO THE EDITOR:
To Bryant Steele, an addendum
And yet, Presley and Stokowski have
their similarities Both were known for
their flamboyant showmanship. Both
raised eyebrows with their affairs.
Stokowski was a gadfly, he went in with
Disney and while the critics fainted the
kids heard classical music in Fantasia
the student who pays hundreds
of dollars a year to go there
would receive a better education.
It was going to be restructured
so that the faculty members
would be better able to
communicate with Davison.
You see, the faculty members
had said that Davison was not an
effective communicator. He was
going to prove to them that he
was. Announcing the restructure
of the College of Arts and
Sciences without first consulting
the dean or the faculty members
of the college would show them
what a good communicator he
could be.
But wait. It is now four months
since the infamous memo was
released. To any normal person
four months later should qualify
as the immediate future. The
College of Arts and Sciences is
still structured almost exactly
like it was last spring. And now,
the powers that be are saying
there will be no major reorgan
izing of the college.
Why the sudden change of
tune? As late as July, then
Acting Vice President for Aca
demic Affairs Merle Prunty was
holding secret meetings, plotting
various ways to reorganize the
College of Arts and Sciences so
that the dean would no longer
have any power. Why is a
structure which was unaccept
able then acceptable now?
Because now there is no reason
to take away the power of the
dean. The old dean is gone, and
in his place is a new dean who, it
can be assumed, will not dare to
make the same mistakes as the
old dean did.
The old dean could have stuck
around and fought it out. He
could have forced Davison to
publicly fire him. He knew he
had the support of his faculty. He
knew public opinion would be on
his side.
But Stephens, unlike the
president, apparently cares a-
bout what is best for the
University. And he apparently
saw that if he did not resign he
would be under continuous
harassment and pressure. Worse
than that, his college would be
destroyed. And so he resigned.
But the hard times may not be
over for Davison. The acting
dean. William J. Payne, also has
the support of the Arts and
Sciences faculty, at least so far.
Payne has said he is “not here
just to sign papers.”
And Davison’s little escapades
of last spring and summer have
certainly not made him any
more popular with the faculty.
Payne has said it will be up to
the Arts and Sciences faculty
senate whether or not to have
another faculty poll this year. If
Davison wants to improve his
ratings from the faculty he had
better begin work on it now. It
may already be too late.
for all’
He miffed the snobs by arranging
low-priced concerts in New York City,
and poor people heard the classics
Presley was just another gyrating
guitar-picker, but his voice “had
something ." They may or may not be
worlds apart But. Mr Steele, as Leopold
so nicely said it. there is "music for all of
us."
J.H. COLLIN'S
Letters policy
Letters to the editor should:
Be typed, double spaced, on
a 60-space line
Include name, address and
phone number of contributor
Be original rather than
duplicates o! letters to olher
persons or publications
Mail letters to The Red and
Black. 309 Journalism build
ing, or bring by 309 Journal
ism building
The Bert Lance affair has been the
most difficult and trying situation
President Jimmy Carter has dealth with
since he took office nine months ago. It
has become a national tragedy in the
eyes of many (es
pecially those from
Georgia), but the
feel'ng is certainly
not limited to that
quarter.
The loss of Lance
is a crippling blow
to the Carter admin
istration Carter had
counted on Lance to spearhead the
reorganization of the bureaucracy and
assist in balancing the budget, two major
campaign promises that contributed
mightily to Carter's election.
The basic problem with the Lance
investigation from the beginning was the
way in which it was handled Carter’s
advisers 'Jordan, Powell) had read an
FBI report about Lance’s banking history
before Carter nominated Lance and
failed to inform the President-elect
because they didn't consider it particu
larly important or damaging.
Carter, because of his close relation
ship with Lance, failed to require the
close personal scrutiny of Lance that
other high level appointees received.
That was an extremely serious mistake.
Carter’s statements that he knew Lance
personally and therefore had an
extensive knowledge of the man’s
character, while no doubt true, are not
Gregg Steinle is state editor of The Red
and Black
sufficient reason to neglect a thorough
background check in the arena of
big-time, power politics.
The Congressional confirmation com
mittee is certainly no less responsible for
the subsequent chain of events than are
Carter or Lance In the euphoria of a
Democratic presidential victory, the
democratic senators had no desire to
probe extensively into the problems in
Lance’s banking career, even though
they were aware of them to a limited
extent.
The Republicans, outnumbered and in
full retreat, could not at the time mount
an offensive in an area they would have
surely liked to have investigated further.
Anyway, the original confirmation was
a rubber-stamp and Lance became
director of the Office of Management and
Budget (OMB).
But the issue didn’t die Reports in the
press continued to cast doubt on Lance’s
previous financial activities and his
present financial troubles. Most of the
press reports were based on leports
issued by the Comptroller General’s
office or upon actions people in that
department took in order to curry favor
with the incoming administration.
These reports criticized Lance’s
banking practices as unsound, and at one
point he was accused of violating one
banking law.
He did apparently violate part of the
banking code, but it must be noted that
violations of the type are generally dealt
with in a remedial fashion by the
Comptroller’s Office rather than by
turning the case over to the Justice
Department for prosecution. Such was
the case with Lance.
Many of Lance s defenders have
charged Lance was attacked by the
federal bureaucracy because, as director
of OMB. he would be the President’s
point man in a drive to reorganize the
government. Such an effort would put the
jobs and power of many bureaucrats in
jeopardy. Therefore. Lance was a major
threat and had to go.
The question is this, was Bert Lance
the victim of bureaucracy determined to
remove him from the administration or
the victim of a normal political process
designed to insure governmental officials
are both competent and honest? The
latter is most certainly true and there
are dangerous indications that the former
may be as well.
Lance, because of his banking
practices, has been made to look from
coast’ to coast as if he is an incompetent
banker who can’t even balance his own
checkbook. That does not appear to be
the case. The assets of the Calhoun
National Bank increased by several
hundred percent while he was chief
executive officer and the assets of the
National Bank of Georgia increased while
he was associated with it. Nor did anyone
ever accuse Lance of incompetence in
running OMB None of the above is
meant as justification for any specific
actions by Lance, but only to point out he
was extremely competent at his job.
Nevertheless, he is certainly unortho
dox, at least by national banking
standards (but not necessarily by rural
Georgia standards), and this may have
had a great deal to do with his success as
a banker.
However, it is true Lance used bank
funds to finance a gubernatorial
campaign, which is highly unethical by
anyone’s standards, be they from
Georgia or elsewhere. True, the money
was returned, with interest, but that does
not excuse Lance for the action.
While Lance does not seem to be
personally dishonest, he does seem to be
a wheeler-dealer, who bends laws but
rarely breaks them. How much
contribution that made to the develop
ment of Lance's reputation as a rising
star in the banking world is unknown, but
is probably considerable.
The problem is in determining how
sanitary we will demand political leaders
to be. Must they be snow white, with no
allowance tor past errors, individuality
or experimentation? Has the bureaucra
cy acheived the power to manipulate the
politicians in Congress and the media to
such an extent that they can pick and
choose who their supporters will be?
It is probably not the case that Lance
was singled out for disposal because of
his position and intentions. Rather, when
a weakness appeared in the administra
tion armor, the bureaucracy as a whole
made an organized scramble to provide
any information that could in any way be
damaging to Lance’s position.
Then came the inevitable extension of
the practice. People began believing
everything they heard because it sounded
right Thus. Ribicoff and Percy were both
suckered by a small time embezzler into
believing Lance was a thief.
Both Senators actually went to Carter
with that “evidence" and then spoke of it
in veiled terms to the national media
From that point on, Lance was finished.
If standards must be impeccable,
reform of government will be extremely
difficult because purity is a rare
commodity and powerful vested interests
are deeply entrenched with many
facilities at their disposal to protect their
office and themselves at the expense of
the nation as a whole.
If the government has reached this
insulated point, serious questions must be
asked about the very status of liberty in
this country. If the bureaucrats have
such a hold on government and thereby,
the people, that they can prevent reform
of themselves, all citizens have lost
rights guaranteed by the Constitution.
MATT PRICHARD
All I want is equal protection
"We regret to inform you, Mr.
Rodriguez, that you have been denied
admission to the Cardenas School of
Medicine.”
Thuse words have become the focal
point of a heated
controversy over fe
deral affirmative ac
tion guidelines since
Enrique Rodriguez
decided to sue the
California Board of
Regents on charges
of reverse discrimi
nation
Rodriguez has been denied admission
to the Cardenas School despite the fact
that his test scores were higher than
many of the scores of white minority
applicants
The school has established a quota
system that sets aside 16 places in each
class for white students. These 16
students are placed in a separate
admissions pool and allowed to compete
only with each other
The California Supreme Court ruled in
Rodriguez’ favor
Justice Maria Gomez, in writing the
majority decision for the court, noted
Matt Prichard is copy editor of The Red
and Black
that "the lofty purpose of the Fourteenth
Amendment that secures equal treatment
for everyone is incompatable with the
idea that some races may be afforded a
higher degree of protection against
unequal treatment than others ”
Now the case has gone all the way to
the nation's capital in El Paso The
Supreme Court will soon make the
momentous decision
Capitol Flat experts expect a statement
of support from President Jaime Cartero.
Other administration officials have also
indicated their support. Secretary of
Housing Carmela Harrisea is said to
have been the most adamant. "We don't
want any uncertainty about our rules
Give the gringos—uh—whites their 16
places.”
“If the Supreme Court agrees with
Rodriguez.” says NAAWP general
counsel Nathaniel Andrews, "we will
have to start over again with
desegregation ”
The case will also involve the question
of just how far federal regulations should
go
"A quota means that whatever
happens, you have to fill a certain
number of slots. If you can’t find
qualified people, you fill the slots
anyhow." Labor Secretary Carlos Marti
nez said
"However,” he continued, ‘‘hiring
goals, which affirmative action calls for,
means that you try to find people who
meet the requirements you have. If you
can’t, then you don’t do it Your defense
is if you tried to find people and if they
were available.”
‘‘The setting aside of 16 places at
Cardenas looks to me like a quota,"
Professor Francisco Diaz of the Phoenix
School of Law said.
“Can a country that has equal
opportunity for all be one in which all the
groups and subgroups are represented in
all disciplines and all jobs in numerical
proportion ot the total population?” he
asked
A similar case came up when Nevada
prison guard Enrique Segundo filed suit
against the state Department of
Corrections for reverse discrimination
Segundo became a guard in 1966. was
made sergeant five years later and by
1975 had passed all the tests for
lieutenant. Then two whites and a woman
were promoted over Segundo
“I was told that my color was wrong,”
Segundo said.
Segundo won the case and a state judge
has enjoined the department from using
racial and sexual criteria for promotions.
"I don’t feel guilty for something that
happened in 1847 Making up for that is a
lot of basura All I ask is equal
protection, like the Constitution says,"
Segundo said.