editorial
Page two/Carolina Journal/September 5, 19\
Problems ahead with new financial act
By the very nature of our political system and the
pluralistic society in which we live, any piece of
legislation must contain many compromises and
imperfections. Very often this process leads to the
creation of legislation which is basically sound in
nature, but which contains provisions that tend to be
counterproductive to the sound intent of the
legislation. The Financial Procedures Act presently
before the Student Legislature for consideration
contains many badly needed provisions for assuring our
student funds are allocated and used in a proper
manner. At the same time, it contains several
provisions which do not serve the interests of the
students in the manner set forth in the rest of the act.
Specifically, Article IV, Section 2 requires “each
club and/or organization shall be required to keep a set
of books listing receipts, disbursements and a current
balance of all monies allocated to them by Student
tffcr
Liquor-by-the-drink
By Michael D. Evans
Passage of the Mecklenburg County
liquor-by-the-drink referendum is a necessary step in
the progressive movement of Metrolina society. The
heated arguments publicized by both sides are readily
available to the public, and because of their aggressive
nature, provide little intrinsic value to the voter in
formulating their decision.
The liquor-by-the-drink referendum does not
provide a clearcut ideological boundary. Those
conservatives who are not strictly religious or who
favor the revenues of big business more than religious
affiliation tend to favor the referendum.
On the other hand, there are a number of the
liberal sector who oppose the bill because of the
damage to the body caused by alcohol. All in all,
strange bedfellows have been created through this
controversial issue.
Why is liquor-by-the-drink such a necessity? To
appease our conservative friends, one could go on
about the benefits for big business in Charlotte - more
conventions coming to the city, increased restaurant
revenue, etc. However, there are much better reasons.
Basically, every citizen of the Charlotte community
should be given the opportunity to purchase the type
of drink they desire with no interference from the
government or any other agency. The moral issues, the
financial issues, all become moot points when looking
at the basic liberty being denied under the present
system.
The broad issue of health is consistently brought
into the referendum discussion by opponents. Health,
one must assume, includes the occurence of alcoholics,
the possibility of permanent damage caused by alcohol
and the number of traffic fatalities due to a
supposedly higher incidence of drunken driving. The
amount of actual alcohol consumed, though, is likely
to be much less than is presently the case, as the cost
of drinking will be much higher, and the
restaurant/lounge owners are not going to be using as
much alcohol in drinks as one would use when
brownbagging.
The fact is the decade of the seventies is almost
over, and the state of North Carolina is one of the few
backward states left which has not approved
liquor-by-the-drink. This is only one of the many areas
in which we lag behind, contrary to the statements
made recently by Jim Hunt expressing an opposite
view, and it is time for the state of North Carolina, led
by Metrolina, considered by most the progressive
center of the state, to begin catching up with the rest
of American society. Support of the
liquor-by-the-drink referendum is only one miniscule
step in the direction out state should head, but it is
very definitely a positive step.
Legislature.” Also, line itemizations on these books
will have to conform to the line itemizations as
contained within their budgets as approved by the
Student Legislature.
The provision which permits the treasurer to audit
the books of any club or organization receiving funds
from the Student Legislature at anytime, without
notice, shall hopefully make these organizations more
responsible in requesting and handling their funds.
Another good provision of this act (Article IV,
Section 8) requires clubs and organizations to submit
budgetary requests for the next fiscal year which runs
from July 1 to June 30 by Feb. 1. This request must
then receive action by the Student Legislature by April
1 of the same year. This would give clubs and
organizations the time to adjust their expenditure plans
accordingly. There are many other good provisions
By Sammy Hamrick
Mecklenburg County voters should reject the
mixed drink referendum on Friday. This is not an
exclusively wet/dry issue. The bottom line on this
question is simply; do they citizens of this county
favor the present system of controlled sale of alcoholic
beverages or will they back what I regard as a fly by
night system of de-control?
Alcohol is the most abused drug in our society
today. There are 18 ABC stores in Mecklenburg
County which sell liquor. If the Friday referendum
passes, this number will increase to over 300 alcoholic
outlets including restaurants, clubs and lounges. Studies
show alcoholic -consumption increases with the
availability of alcohol. Obviously, liquor-by-the-drink
will increase the availability of America’s most abused
drug in Mecklenburg.
And what will these 300 liquor-by-the-drink
establishments be like? The main point, here is
businesslike. These establishments will be out to make
a fast buck by making over 500 percent profit on a
bottle of liquor sold by the drink. Drinks will range
from $1.50 to over 2.50. In addition to these high
prices, you can expect a cover charge at places
featuring any kind of entertainment.
Bars will cause de-control of alcohol. Today,
employees of ABC stores are paid set wages whether
they sell a fifth or 10,000 gallons. With
liquor-by-the-drink, dispersing alcohol will be the job
of bartenders, waiters and waitresses. These persons are
in business to sell liquor, not control it. Making a
profit does not come by control.
The ultimate absurdity from liquor-by-the-drink
proponents is liquor-by-the-drink will entice more out
of state tourists to North Carolina. The fact is North
Carolina already has one of the largest tourist trades in
America. People come to North Carolina to enjoy what
the state has to offer, not to drink liquor.
Also, Mecklenburg County voters cannot really be
sure of what they are voting for. ABC officials have
not finalized the guidelines for enforcement of the
provisions of the referendum. Voters should know
these guidelines before they vote.
Finally, local option is a poor method to control
alcohol. Various systems of control will be much more
confusing in the 100 counties with the added factor of
liquor-by-the-drink. In any event, North Carolina
should decide as a whole when to begin the sale of
mixed drinks. Mecklenburg County should wait for
that day.
Readers are invited and encouraged
to respond to comments made in the
“Left/Right" column.
which cannot be enumerated in this short space.
On the other hand, there are several key provisions
which tend to dilute the good intent of the act as a
whole. First, the question arises after reading the
section dealing with recipients of funds (Article II,
Section 4b), as to the meaning of the phrase “no type
of eliminating process may be used in the selection of
members of clubs and organizations.”
What constitutes an “eliminating process”? Does
requiring members to attend a certain number of club
functions or requiring them to possess a certain type
of skill inherent to the nature of the club, such as
being able to carry a tune to join a campus chorus,
constitute an eliminating process? We hope this was
not the intent of this section, but, in any case, this is
much too vague to be adopted in its present form.
The worst provision of the Financial Procedures
Act is contained in the section dealing with the
“procedure for receiving funds from Student
Legislature” (Article IV, Section Ih) which reads as
follows: “Any member of the Finance Committee who
belongs to a club or organization whose budget is
being considered by the committee must abstain from
voting on any matters dealing with that specific budget
at the time of the budget hearing.”
On face value, this provision raises some serious
questions as to the right of any legislature, by
legislative fiat, to deprive any elected representative of
their vote on any matter before the legislature.
Concurrently, this provision deprives many groups on
this campus of a voice in matters before the Finance
Committee. As an example, if a commuter
representative is a member of the Black Student Union
and is not able to vote on the BSU budget request, the
commuter students would be deprived of a voice on
that matter. Representatives are elected to represent
their constituents and should not be prohibited from
representing them because they happen to be a
member of a certain club or organization. At the same
time, this provision seems to be demeaning to the
integrity of the members of the legislature.
In conclusion, we can appreciate the time and
effort that went into the drafting of this act, but
because of the aforementioned problems, we
respectfully urge the members of the Student
Legislature to consider the difficulties with this piece
of legislation in its present form before acting on it.
John Deal & Dave Webb
Carolina Journal
“I must Create a System
man's.”
Nancy Davis
James Braswell
Jeff Nash
Gary Nelson
Kim Burns
Joyce Wright
Jim Dedmon
Robin Colby
Steve Swetnam
Bob Mellnik
or be enslav’d by another
-William Blake
Editor
Managing Editor
Business Manager
Advertising Manager
News Editor
Arts/Features Editor
Sports Editor
Photography Editor
Graphic Artist
Distribution
The Carolina Journal is the student newspaper of
the University of North Carolina at Charlotte
(UNCC). The Carolina Journal is published each
Tuesday of the academic year. Journal Publications
typesets the Carolina Journal and it is printed by the
Weekly Newspapers, Inc., located at 4433 North 1-85
in Charlotte, N.C. Please address all correspondence
to: Carolina Journal; Cone University Center; UNCC
Station; Charlotte, N.C. 28223. Our telephone
numbers are 59 7-2325 and 59 7-2160.
The opinions expressed in the text of the
Carolina Journal are not necessarily those of the
University of North Carolina at Charlotte, of the
student body or of any agency or individual affiliated
with the University.
Che opinions expressed in signed editorials are
those of the writer, and not necessarily those of the
Editorial Board. Opinions expressed in unsigned
editorials express those of the Editorial Board.
The Carolina Journal will print any
correspondence to the students within the limits of
good taste. We reserve the right to edit for grammar,
length and clarity. Correspondence not wished to be
published in the Carolina Journal should be
designated as such.