6The Daily Tar HeelTuesday, October 27 1981
Jim Hummel. Ma
Susan Mauney. Mnugmx &ln
Jonathan Rich. Asmuv cin
JOHN DRESNER.''- EJtar
Edwin a Ralston, iMnmiy Bin
John Royster. cay d
Charles Herndon. sur - maw Edit
BETH BURRELL. Nm .wr
Clifton Barnes. Sw
Tom Moore. Am eJiw
Keith King, Frjiu
Scott Sharpe. pwwty bLw
Ann Peters, NWt:' jji.r
Chuck James, ombudman
8
CoaEtiiDiis' wage battle in Cairfoor election
By KAREN HAYWOOD
ar JIM
9fr year o editorial freedom
Major shift
It is a sign of the times that while history and English deans wring their
hands over declining enrollment, the UNC economics department now
. faces a glut of interested students. While many fondly remember the 1960s
as a heyday for liberal arts, a new orientation toward business and econo
mics will have to be addressed.
The request last week by the UNC economics department for a reallo
cation of faculty and resources is based on legitimate and pressing con
cerns. Between 1975 and the spring of 1981, the number of economics
majors rose from 102 to 468. More recently, the decision to tighten busi
ness school requirements has forced many students to change their majors
from business to economics or industrial relations.
Despite the significant increase in these majors, the economics depart
ment has maintained a constant level of 33 to 34 professors since 1975.
The result, in simple economic terms, has been an excess demand for a
limited supply.
With 9,000 students now taking economics courses, recently declared
economics and industrial relations majors are finding it increasingly dif
ficult to fulfill their requirements. Meanwhile, there is a potential for a
decrease in the general quality of education as faculty must now teach
larger introductory courses rather than ones in their specialized fields.
The economics department's request for greater resources is being
studied by Arts and Sciences Dean Samuel Williamson, who will ultimately
decide on the matter. While Williamson and members of his task force to
study the issue recognize the overcrowding problem, there is concern that
the nejy emphasis on business and economics is only temporary, and will
shift back to other fields if the economy improves.
The issue is further complicated by the desire of economics and busi
ness professors to reverse what they feel is an undue emphasis on business-oriented
majors.
There is little question that the-administration and Student Govern
ment should work collectively to reorient students toward broader fields
of study. Concerned with their immediate future in a tight job market,
students often do not realize that many employers seek people with a
broader educational background.
But such efforts require time and will not solve the current dilemna. A
decision to wait it out until the economy takes a sudden and unexpected
turn for the better would be a risky proposition. The trend toward business-related
majors has steadily increased for more than six years, while
the economics department, better than anyone, recognizes that the na
tion's economic future is anything but optimistic.
If Williamson decides against new allocations, the economics depart
ment will face two equally unattractive alternatives: it can continue to
struggle with overcrowded conditions or it could follow the business
school in restricting its enrollment. Either way, the best interests of the
students would not be served.
Excessive restriction
If a recent proposal by the Department of Education to change the
structure of several financial aid programs is adopted by Congress next
year, thousands of students across the country could have a hard time
paying for their college educations next year.
The revisions, published earlier this month in the Federal Register,
would dramatically increase the percentage of money that students and
their families have to contribute to educational expenses in order to
qualify for the federal grants.
In order to qualify for Pell Grants, which are based on financial need,
families would be required to contribute a minimum of 40 percent of
their "discretionary" income to college expenses. The current minimum
is 10.5 percent.
Wltfe the department's efforts to eliminate abuse in financial aid pro
grams are admirable, this particular restriction if passed, would represent
a major alteration of the Pell Grant program, and would reduce even fur
ther poorer students' chances of attending the college or university of
their choice. Even more disturbing is the fact that several other aid pro
grams, including work-study and Guaranteed Student Loans would face
similarly severe cutbacks.
The Reagan adniinistration has made it clear that cuts are coming
sooner or later and that some students will have to make ends meet as
best they can. Fortunately, many of the cutbacks proposed for this year
were not as drastic as originally forecast, but UNC officials predict it is
only a matter of time before aid money begins to dry up, adding that the
real crunch will come next fall.
Fortunately, House and Senate members already have expressed some
reservations about the proposed restrictions and are moving to change the
plan. The Department of Education has given the public until Dec. 15 to
comment on the proposals. Congressmen, university officials and
students alike should express their concern about the limitations and urge
the government to modify its plan accordingly.
Campaigning is becoming intense during the last week
before the election in Carrboro next Tuesday.
The Association for a Better Carrboro is challenging
the Carrboro Community Coalition's stand on open
government, downtown revitalization, transportation,
financial management,, a new community park and other
issues. Two candidates not affiliated with either group
are also running for the mayor's seat and a position on
the town board. -
The Coalition has endorsed aldermen candidates Brax
ton Foushee, Doug Sharer and Nancy White. The Coali
tion is supporting Mayor Robert Drakeford for reelection.
ABC is supporting Hilliard Caldwell and Joyce Garret
for the town board and Roger Messer for mayor.
Jim White, an independent candidate who agrees with
ABC on many issues, is seeking a seat on the town board.
Mayoral candidate Bill Pressley is not affiliated with
either ABC or the Coalition.
Spokesmen for the Coalition and ABC have outlined
their positions on the issues in this campaign.
The Carrboro Community Coalition, regarded as a
progressive group, was formed in 1972 to prevent the
main building of the historic Carr Mill from being torn
down and replaced by a shopping center.
The group was successful in saving the building, alder
man and Coalition member Steve Rose said.
"Carrboro was strictly horse-and-buggy then,' Rose
said. It was hard to get anything done if you weren't one
of the people in charge, he said.
Seeking to become a political force, the Coalition en
dorsed candidates for mayor and aldermen in the follow
ing election. 1
In the past, the Coalition has worked for bikeways,
recreation and improved transportation. The Coalition
has also tried to get student opinion into town affairs.
, Richard Ellington, spokesman for ABC, said the Coa
lition had too much control over town government.
v IP
illiili
V
DTHFaith Outnlaveli
Richard Ellington
Letters to the editor
Members of the Coalition hold five of the six alderman
seats, and the mayor's chair.
ABC has described itself as "slightly left of middle of
the road," not as conservative as the Coalition has
charged.
Although the Coalition has said that 60 percent of the
town boards and committees are made up of non-Coalition
members, ABC said that many of these non-Coalition
members were friends of the Coalition and favored
its policies.
ABC was formed "to improve relations between town
hall and the citizens, to return the town to the people,
and to make Carrboro a community which both serves
and is served by the citizens," a position statement for
ABC said.
ABC has accused the Coalition of discouraging busi
nesses from locating in Carrboro. It points to the recent
suit with the fast-food chain Wendy's as an example.
Before the construction of Wendy's there was a vacant
lot where many people parked. An attempt was made to
regulate parking or to regulate left turns out of the lot,
Ellington said.
"Now, when Wendy's is going to put a small business
(there) and use a small area for parking, all of a sudden
it's a traffic problem," Ellington said.
Rose said that when the vacant lot was used for park
ing, few cars parked there and the entrance to the lot was
farther from the intersection of West Main and Greens
boro streets than Wendy's entrance is.
In addition, Rose said, there was less traffic in and out
of the lot when people parked there before Wendy's was
built.
ABC maintains that the town should work more close
ly with the Chapel Hill-Carrboro Chamber of Commerce
to find out what the business community as a whole would
like to see done. ABC is in favor of altering rules and reg
ulations that prevent businesses from coming to Carrboro.
The Coalition disagreed with ABC's assessment of the
board's interactions with the business community.
"In the last year and a half, the board approved pro
jects with a total value of $33 million," Rose said.
Rose said the town reenacted a land-use ordinance last
year to streamline the (conditional use) permit process
and reduce delays for developers seeking to build in and
outside of Carrboro.
"We are moving on all fronts to expand Carrboro 's
economic base," Rose said.
Since Ellington and Hilliard Caldwell campaigned
against the bus referendum last year, Coalition members
have accused ABC of being anti-bus transportation.
Caldwell's and Ellington's phone numbers were among
those listed in an ad in local newspapers urging citizens
to vote no on the referendum.
"Does a leopard change his spots in 12 months?" Rose
. asked. "If they have been for buses, where have they
been for the past five years?"
"Their indictment that ABC as anti-bus is an outright
lie," Ellington said. Candidates Garrett and Messer were
not even involved in the referendum, Ellington said.
Ellington and Caldwell are the only members of ABC
who campaigned against the referendum and their pur
pose was "to speak against taxation in general" since
they had been recently annexed by the town, Ellington
said.
ABC and the two candidates not aligned with either
group have accused the present board and the Coalition
of financial mismanagement.
1 :! .:
Steve Rose
Carrboro will take $500,000 from the general fund to
balance this year's budget. This money had taken several
years to accumulate. ABC said this was evidence of the
town's mismanagement of funds.
Rose said the money went for certain expenses that
would not occur every year, such as lawsuits with the
Orange Water and Sewer Authority and the U.S. Census
Bureau.
That Carrboro has had only two tax increases in six
years is evidence of fiscal responsibility, the Coalition
has said.
ABC has said that with current inflation rates, the two
increases in six years indicate that either the town has
been overtaxing its residents for the' first few years, or if
the tax rates were reasonable during the first years, the
town has been spending money it does not have in the
last several years.
The recently-opened community part on N.C. 54 West
is another conflict.
The park is over half a mile from the edge of town
limits and ABC charges that its placement is illogical.
The only closer site large enough for a park was own
ed by a woman whose house was on the 50- to 60-acre
site, Rose said. . -
ABC supporters were against the town buying the
land from the woman and the town realized that unless it
picked another site there would be no park, Rose said.
Ellington said the town published a brochure on the
park, indicating the woman's land as a site for the park
without consulting her.
The park issue, and others, remain unsettled. Only the
election will calm the heated debate between the two po
litical groups.
Karen Haywood, a junior journalism and English major
from Charlotte, is a staff writer for The Daily Tar Heel.
Solidarity PATCO should not be compared
To the editor:
I would like to thank David Neal
Graham for noticing the College Repub
licans petition supporting the Polish
workers in their struggle with their com
munist government ("Strange support,"
DTH, Oct. 21).
I also would like to point out that the
aim of Solidarity is to reduce government
control of the Polish workers, an ideal
which goes hand in hand with what Pre
sident Ronald Reagan is doing. Current
union proposals may not make Poland a
full-fledged free enterprise zone, but the
workers are definitely headed in the right
direction.
Communist Poland is now suffering
from a short supply of food and, just re
cently, the government announced a con
troversial new increase in the price of fish,
fruit and cigarettes. The state-owned coal
companies are lagging in production and
many Poles may find their heat and hot
water cut off from time to time during the
winter. These developments combine
with the already sick Polish economy to
make things awfully bleak for the govern
ment of ! the country's new leader,
Wojciech Jaruzelski. It's amazing what so
much government regulation and control
can do, isn't it?
Mr. Graham's argument that Republi
cans should feel uneasy supporting Soli
darity and opposing the air traffic con
trollers' strike simply does not hold up in
light of the very great differences between
free America and communist Poland.
When air traffic controllers voluntarily
signed with the government, they were
fully aware of the non-strike clause in
their contracts. They had the option of
I I I If"'" """"ft
i .... : I tsv 1 .
accepting those terms or finding employ
ment outside the government where there
are no such restrictions on striking.
Unfortunately, before the existence of
Solidarity, Poles did not have such an op
tion in their state-controlled society.
Also, any president, whether Republican
or Democrat, would have been compelled
by federal law to oppose the illegal con
trollers' strike. Even Jimmy Carter would
have been legally bound to oppose it.
Finally, I do not want to disappoint
Mr. Graham, but the College Republi
cans are not "democratic socialists." We
are free enterprise capitalists who, like the
Poles, want to see the government pushed
back to performing only its most basic
and needed functions. And we proudly
stand behind President Reagan in his at
tempt to do just that.
i
Steve Long
Chairman
. UNC College Republicans
The Bottom Line
Jk
eagan yemreactis with immiigraitioiii laws
Mistaken identity
It was a search for glory, honor,
school pride and a ram.
The week of the UNC-N.C. State
football game two UNC students
overheard the plans of the Sigma Al
pha Mu fraternity at State to kidnap
Ramses, the UNC mascot. So they
went to the SAM house in Raleigh
the Friday night . before the State
game to do some detective work.
Not long after they arrived, they
saw some of the brothers leaving in a
car and decided to follow them. They
stared in disbelief as the brothers got
out of the car near a field off Western
Boulevard and approached a tree in
the center of the field. Tied to the tree
was a ram and these NCSU fraternity
brothers were feeding it.
After the brothers left, the Caro
lina students wasted no time in com
ing to the ram's rescue. They untied
him ana dragged mm by the horns to
their station wagon, which was park
ed nearly half a mile away. The ram
was so reluctant that they began to
wonder is perhaps poor Ramses had
been brainwashed by the fraternity
members. Or maybe they were deal
ing with a wolf in sheep's skin?
The ram promptly relieved himself
in the back seat of the station wagon.
But since he is our ram and a symbol
of our great University, the UNC
students endured the unpleasant ride
back to Chapel Hill.
At 1 a.m. the students rushed into
the the Chapel Hill Police Department
to relate the story of the horrible crime
and its now happ result. The officer
on duty, however, was skeptical.
He peered into the station wagon
and said, "That's not Ramses."
Well, it's the thought that counts.
And that's the bottom line.
By KEITH BRO WN
- Immigration, particularly illegal immigration, has long
been a controversial topic in American politics. Since we
are a nation of immigrants, we often feel an underlying
uneasiness about denying entry to anyone who wants to
; come here. At the same time, the problem of unemploy
ment caused, by the entry of illegal aliens into the labor
market leads us to seek restrictions. The matter is further'
complicated when legal quotas of immigrants are re
duced by the ex post facto legalization of entry of illegal
aliens, thus penalizing aliens who are waiting for legal
entry.
The present administration has recently introduced a
legislative package designed to restrict immigration
through a variety of tactics. The right to appeal the Im
, migration and Naturalization Service's decisions on ex
clusion and deportation would be curtailed. In addition,
the president could declare an emergency, lasting up to
one year, whenever he determined that a substantial
number of illegal aliens were on their way here or about
to embark. Under this emergency, the president would
have extensive powers. He could:
(1) order the sealing of any point of entry.
(2) have illegal aliens placed in detention camps to
await deportation hearing, subject to release only
on orders from the Attorney General (without
the right of judicial appeal).
(3) order the detention campus built without regard
V to their impact on the environment or neighboring
areas. ,
(4) . restrict the right of American citizens to travel,
both domestically and within a certain distance
... of a designated foreign country.
(5) order the boarding of foreign vessels on the high
seas to search for illegal aliens.
These proposals would be laughable if they were not
introduced in all seriousness. Almost all of them violate
the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment
which states that the government cannot deny any per
son life, liberty or property. without due legal processs.
This protection has long been extended to aliens in this
country. Independent judicial appeals would be forbid
den in asylum and exclusion cases, as well as in cases of
the detention and transfer of aliens.
In restricting the right of Americans to travel within
their own country, the United States becomes little better
than the Soviet Union, where internal passports and tra
vel permits are necessary. Restricting travel to a certain
foreign country where the safety of Americans cannot be
guaranteed is somewhat defensible, but restricting travel
within a certain distance of a foreign country is absurd.
The last provision is a blatant violation of international
law. Even the Reagan administration admits its illegality!
This particular violation should be esp5cially repugnant
to Americans because variations on it brought us into
two wars. A central issue of the War of 1812 was British
violations of our neutrality by stopping our ships to look
for British deserters. One reason for American entry into '
World War I was that German ships stopped and search
ed neutral American ships on the high seas to look for
contraband. In attempting to extend our jurisdiction to
international waters the United States would be com
mitting the same offense. ' U-
The problem caused by illegal aliens must be dealt
with, but the Reagan administration's proposals fall far
short of a reasonable solution. It has been suggested that
these proposals represent an opening bid for a negotia
ting position. One hopes that Congress will recognize the
unconstitutionality and illegality of the package and
quickly send it to a well-deserved death.
Keith Brown is a graduate student in political science
from Roanoke, Ala.