Newspapers / Meredith College Student Newspaper / Oct. 1, 1980, edition 1 / Page 2
Part of Meredith College Student Newspaper / About this page
This page has errors
The date, title, or page description is wrong
This page has harmful content
This page contains sensitive or offensive material
PAGE 2 THE TWIG OCTOBER 1, 1980 THE MEREDITH TWIG COLLEGE Editors Reporters Columnists Photographers Sports Editor Business Manager Circulation Layout Editor Layout Staff Cartoonist Proofreading Advertising Manager Exchange Editor Faculty Advisors V. Sonya Ammons, Deborah Bartlett Jill Allen, Nan Davis, Maresa Firth, Wendy Fischer, Beth Giles, Shirene Hritzko, Maynell Johnson, Susan McDonough, Heidi Nill, Kathy O’Brien, Cindy Rinker, Linda Sellers, Sandra Vail, Cynthia Washington Cindy Rinker, Ann Stringfield Ruthie McCollum, Jackie Duong, Kelly Sullivan, Lori Whittemore Darla Stephenson Mary Jacque Peterson Terri Hoffman, Susan McDonough Susan Jones Maresa Firth, Maynell Johnson Allison Honeycutt, Heidi Nill, Linda Sellers, Cynthia Washington Wendy Fischer Shirene Hritzko, Susan McDonough Carolyn Dunn Ann Stringfield Dr. Donald Samson, Mr. Bill Norton, Dr. Thomas Parramore Politics ’80- Sfiitot- by Cindy Rinker Campaign financing - a promise to some candidates, a plague to other's. With the election process in full swing, the question is popping up of “who is paying for the massive political camp- signs?” The public? The private? The answer is both. In 1972 Congress passed the Federal Election Cam paign Act which required candidates for the U.S. House of Representatives, the U.S. Senate, and the Presidency, as well as the political com mittees which support them, to file detailed campaign finance reports. Also established in the Act was public financing for presidential candidates in the general election. In 1974 and 1976 the Act was amended to include public financing of presidential primary elections and limits on campaign contributions. Congress has not yet put limits on con tributions to house and senate races. Under the FEC Act the following contributions made in connection with any Federal election are prohibited: - contributions made from the treasuries of national banks, colorations and labor organizations, contributions from government contractors, - contributions from foreign nationals who are not per manent residents of the U.S. - contributions of cash from one person which, in one lump sum, total more than $100 per campaign period, - contributions supplies by one person made in the name of another, - contributions in excess of federal limitations. Contributions to include gifts of money, loans and gifts of goods or services. Volun teer work is not considered contribution. Federal limitations of contributions from an individual or a political committee are as follows: each may give $1,000 to each candidate per election, $20,000 to a national party committee per year, and $5,000 to any other political committee per year. As far as spending goes, the Supreme Court has ruled that limits on campaign spending may inhibit the candidate’s freedom of ex pression. However, the Court allowed the limits to remain in effect if any public campaign funds are accepted by can didates. Since the major candidates for the Presidency do take public money, the spending limit of $10 million applies to each. Taxpayers pay for most of the presidential race by contributing, voluntarily, one dollar of their Federal income tax. After the presidential candidates have raised donations, the Federal government matches funds dollar for dollar, with certain guidelines to be followed. Public money is also provided for the two major party conventions - two million dollars each. Campaign financing has been, and will continue to be, an issue brought up in the public’s eye each election year. In an attempt to prevent corruptness in the election process as much as possible, campaign finance reform has played an important part in the election system since the earliest elections of the U.S. and, hopefully, will continue to do so in the future. At a recent faculty meeting, it was stated that the Faculty Affairs Committee is looking into the policies which determine whether a faculty member will be granted tenure at Meredith. This is no new issue. Tenure long has been a subject of con troversy at colleges and universities. The Faculty Affairs Committee is not necessarily planning to suggest major changes in tenure policies, but rather to study and clarify the relative merit of the various factors which determine tenure at Meredith. Teaching competence, publications, and community service are all among those factors which are weighed. According to Dr. Bernie Cochran of the Faculty Affairs Committee, Meredith generally tends to place more weight on the teacher’s performance in the classroom, rather than on research and publication. While, ideally, a facul^ member would pursue both areas and allow the two to enhance each other, it is more important that a teacher be skilled in the classroom. At a time when “Publish or perish” is becoming a common phrase at many schools, it is encouraging to know that whether or not a teacher can teach is still important at Meredith. We are proud of our faculty members’ accomplishments in research, their awards for community service, and their development as “total persons.” We admire their reputations as scholars. Many of us hope to follow in their footsteps. But most of all, when we straggle into Organic Chemistry, English Comp., or Foundations of Euclidean Geometry at 8:00 Monday morning, we are glad our teachers can teach. S. A. by Ann Stringfield The Meredith Archives - a touch of history. Not merely receipts, account books and counUess faded faces, but history. What we were then and what we are not now - certainly not mutually ex clusive identities. The thirties are ac curately mirrored in the yellowing records of a then young college. The desperation, economy, youth and humour in a decade of struggle, reflected in a dimming spotlight of the past. Jobs were scarce. President Brewer’s office received at least 15-20 ap plications a month. Teachers from everywhere in the country wrote in the hopes of To submit information to The TWIG, please contact Sonya Ammons (821-7031) or Deborah Bartlett (821-7027) by Friday morning at 10:00 to be printed in the following Wednesday paper. Anyone who is interested in sub mitting photographs and cartoon of campus life is welcome (and invited!) to do so under the same deadline policy. If you have in formation for a story which needs to be covered, please let us know a week and a half before it needs to be printed. This amount of time is necessary for us to make assignments and give reporters time to write stories. Any letters to the editors which are signed and received by 10 o’clock on Friday morning in The TWIG office will be printed in the next Wednesday’s paper, space permitting. an opening. Invariably, they were politely turned down. President Brewer’s courteous reply: “Present incumbent are planning to remain.” One young lady, applying for the position of religious secretary, sent President Brewer a resume, a picture, a letter to her minister ex pressing her interest in the position, his reply, his friend’s comment, her father’s friend’s assessment of her capabilities, and so forth. This file contained 26 separate pieces. She did not, however, get the job. (Overkill.) Less polite in his correspondence was W. A. Yost, treasurer of the college. His files consist of letter after letter requesting some poor individual to pay the overdue interest on his or her loan. Hit hard by the depression, the debtors regretfully replied that they could not make the payment this month but maybe later when times get better.... Mr. Yost wrote a rather firm letter to an elderly debtor in Great Britian. Her son replied forthwith, expressing his lack of appreciation for what he felt was a threatening letter on Mr. Yost’s part. He advised Mr. Yost to refrain from that type of letter in the future. Mr. Yost refrained. The best Yost statement has to be the following: “I suppose you are going to surrender your farm as it has been sold for taxes.” Un doubtedly. Meredith regulations equally mirrored the times. Entertaining company after the light bell, being with a boy unchaperoned, going to a dance... the decadence of youth. Such infractions resulted in campuses and loss of telephone and candy buying privileges; however, “Walking during quiet hour without hose” only brought in demerits. Girls were quite daring when it came to relations with the opposite sex. SGA minutes are filled with references to unchaperoned dates. One brave soul was campused for “riding out to school with a man from the express office to bring out a package.” Evidently, Meredith had a secret police which kept vigilance over the young ladies. How else would they know that two girls went down to Boone Iseley’s Drug Store Thursday night for something to eat? Such were the thirties at Meredith. A time to laugh, a time to cry but surely never a time to dance! Fall Poetry Contest A $1000 grand prize will be awarded in the Sixth Annual Fall Poetry Competition sponsored by the World of Poetry, a quarterly newsletter for poets. Poems of all styles and on any subject are eligible to compete for the grand prize or for 49 other cash or mer chandise awards. Says Poetry Editor Eddie- Lou Cole, “We are en couraging poetic talent of every kind, and expect our contest to produce exciting discoveries ~ like Virginia Bates, a housewife from Woodbine, Maryland. She won our grand prize last year with her poem PIETA.” Rules and official entry forms are available from World of Poetry, 2431 Stockton Blvd., Dept. N, Sacramento, California 95817.
Meredith College Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Oct. 1, 1980, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75