Newspapers / Meredith College Student Newspaper / Nov. 12, 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 NOVEMBER 12, IMO THE MEREDITH TWiG COLLEGE Editw Sonya Ammons Managing Editor Deborah Bartlett AssUtant Editor Ann Stringfleld Reporters Nan Davis, Maresa Firth, Wei^^Flaeher, ^'th Giles, ,;8ta.lrene Hrlttko, May nell Johnson., Su8an~McD6n6uh. Hekll NttI, Kathy O’Brien, Cindy RliiEer, LlndaSeUers, Sandra Vail, Cynthia Washington Cindy Rlnker Ann Stringfleld Terri Hoffman, Jackie Duong, Kelly Sullivan, Lory Whittemore Darla Stephenson Mary Jacque Peterson Terri Hoffman, Susan McDonough Susan Jones Maresa Firth. Maynell Johnson AUlsoo Honeycutt, Heldl Nlll. Linda Sellm^ Cynthia Washington Wendy Fischer CanrfynDunn Ann St^gfield Dr. Donald Samson. Mr. Bill Norton, Dr. Thomas Pammore Cdumnlst Features Photographers Spwts Editor Business Manager Circulation Layout Editor Layout Staff Cartoonist Advertising Manager Exchange Editor Faculty Advisors I voted in Tuesday’s election, but, like most people I know, some of the candidates I voted for were defeated. Besides being disappointed, I have become victim of the notion that maybe my vote really doesn’t count anyway. I know that my feeling is silly and that if everyone felt that way, our system of democracy would be worthless. What concerns me most at this point, however, is not the lack of influence I feel on the national level, but the lack influence I sometimes feel here at Meredith. Of course, I know Uiat we as students are constantly being encouraged to participate. We are told that our opinions are valued. We are allow^ to vote on legislation. For example, on Friday, October 31, a representative group of the student body passed legislation changing closing hours from midnight to 1 a.m. on Sunday'Thursday ni^ts, among other issues. But the student body vote does not a law make. The legislation must now be read before and approved by the Student Life Committee and a subcommittee of SLC. Next, the legislation must be signed and approved by the Dean of Students and the Vice President for Student Development. If deem^ to be of major significance, the legislation must be finally approved by the pr^ident of the college. At any one of these stages, the legislation may be defeated. For this specific piece of le^lation, I have no reason to believe that the student vote will not carry, but in this system of checks and approvals, where does the DOwer o£ the student lie? At least in the area of passing legislation the student is allowed to place her vote, but there are other issues in which the average student has no real voice. What role does the student play in a professor’s receiving tenure? It seems to me that, in the past, tenure has been granted or withheld on the basis of personal relationship of the faculty member with the chairman d the department rather than his ability and interests. We students know which professors teach well. We are not looking for easy courses but courses in which we are stimulated to learn. We know which professors are interested in us, those who have time for us, are available to us if we need them, and can communicate with us. We also know who those professors are who are genuinely concerned with Meredith both now and in the future. Why, then, are we not given the opportunity to voice our opinions, formed from experience, when a professor comes up for tenure? At the minimum, why are we not told when and why a professor does not receive tenure? We as concerned students have the right to ask these questions and to expect answers. DDB The Constitution of the United States, Part I. by Cindy Rlnker The word “un- constitutimal” is and has been thrown around often In the U.S. court system. Judges and Juries are teing forced to determine whether something goes against the principles of Uie constitution or not. Yet how many people know andK>r understand what lies within the Constibition of the United States? The original written constitution consists of a Preamble and seven Articles. The Preamble is the section most familiar to many people. It begins **We the People,** and is a statement of goals - “to form a more pofect union, establish justice, insure domestic tranquility, provide for the common defense, promote the general welfare, and secure the blessings of liberty.” Article I deals mostly with CMigress and is the longest in the constitution. It makes' up more than half of the original Politics ’80 document and is divided into ten sections. Section one grants “all legislative powers" of the national government to a cmgress consisting of a House of R^r6sentatives and a Senate. Sections fpur through seven deal with the election, organization and procedure of the congress, annual sessiwis, ineligibility of members of congress for other govern ment offices, and a presidential veto. Section eight is the most important statement of the juri^iction and authority of the national government; It is a list of the powers congress may exer cise. Speciflc prohibitions on the power of the natiHul government are listed in section nine, and section ten is a list of limits of the state government to interfere in federal areas. As one can see the con stitution is the basis of the government of the U.S. What may at first appear to be a jumble of long detailed descriptions, is in fact a group of clear statements meant to be understood by the people. In the next two issue of The TWIG, Politics ’80 wUl outline the other six Articles of the Constitution and also the Amendments that have been proposed and passed, these including the Bill of Rights. Trouble on the Sontherh flank by Patrick Garrity Mr. Garrity Is Associate Editor with PuUlc Research, Syndicated The hostage crisis, the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan, and now the Iran-Iraq war have taught Americans a general and a particular lesson: In general, these crises have crudely reminded Americans that the world is more inclined to the exercise and more susceptible to the" imposition of raw force than our policy makers would like to believe; in particular, these occurrences have demonstrated to Americans our need and our inability to project power abroad, in peacetime as well as in war. If we must learn these lessons half way round the globe, however, we must apply them much nearer home. For if the United States is to project political and military power in defense of its vital interests abroad (e.g., in the Middle East), it must have security in this hemisphere. We can no longer afford to neglect the growing threats to this security, or to abscure them with wishes for a better world than the one we got. For example, Cuba has become a major advance Soviet military base in the Western Hemisphere. It is capable of threatening the heavily-travelled trade routes throu^ the Caribbean Sea and the Gulf of Mexico, routes which are crucial to the United States. If the United States were to become militarily involved outside tills hemisphere, Cuto-Kmly 90 miles off the Florida coast- would present a serious strategic problem for American security. ^ The TWIG needs photographers for both part- Stime and fulMime help. ^Anyone interested in taking ^pictures and*or developing, Kplease contact Sonya Ammons I (821-7081) or Deborah Bartiett ;(82l-7027). The Castro regime also provides the Soviets with a nucleus around which political and econiHnic interests hostile to the United States can be OTganized. Several Caribbean diplomats have informed Washington that “the Cubans are all over the place in the Caribbean” while “the U.S. is nowhere to be found.” Jamaica and Grenada have increasingly taken a pro- Castro, anti-American stance; St. Lucia, Martinique, and Dominica are reportedly under growing pressure from Cuban-backed subversives. Castro’s support of leftist guerrillas in the Caribbean has caused State Department officials to express their concern about “concentric circles of potential trouble.” This 1980s versi(m of the domino theory holds that Cuban instigated unrest and upheaval on these smaller islands may spread to such larger Caribb^n nations as Haiti and the Dominican Republic, along with the American commonwealth Puerto Rico, where terrorists supported by Cuba have already made numerous attacks on American military personnel. The obvious goal of this process would be to eliminate American military and political influence in the (Caribbean basin. In the past few years, the United States has agreed to relinquish its military bases near the Panama Canal, including the Galeta Island submarine tracking station, and the naval facility in Barbados. The remaining American bases in Puerto Rico and Guantanamo have b^n the targets of a Castro-led propaganda campaign. Panama’s Omar Torrijos now si^pwts Castro's demand for American withdrawal from Guantanamo, as does Mexican President Lopez Portillo. That enclave may thus become the next major symbol of U.S. “colonialism” in the hemisphere. Cuban and soviet agitation in the Caribbean not only threatens America’s “third border,” it also provides a base for threatening the Panama Canal, Central America, and the Mexican oil fields. The unifying of the three San- dinista factions prior to the Nicaraguan revolution was reportedly achieved at an Havana meeting with Castro. Soviet-made arms were airlifted to the Sandinistas through Cuba in supply planes from Europe, Africa, and the Middle East. Virtually every Latin American leftist organization (many of which have been supported by Cuba and the USSR) sent observers or volunteers to Nicaragua. And in the wake of the San- dinista victory, there has been an upsurge in terrorist ac tivity along the Caribbean basin-most notably in El Salvador and Colombia, where several embassies have been seized as part of a broader pattern of anti government disturbances. In South America, the Carter Administration’s policies have estranged the United States from its traditional allies, while weakening American in fluence. After disputes over the Beagle Channel and conflicting Antarctic claims nearly led to war between Chile and Argentina in 1978, the two antgonists-once American allies-turned to other powers for assistance. Argentina expanded its economic relations with the Soviet Unlm, received several high-level Soviet military delegations, and, finally, refused to support the American grain embargo against tiie USSR. Chile, in turn, signed a number of trade and economic agreements with the People’s Republic of China. The Slno^oviet dispute may thus be extended at some future date to the Western Hemisphere by two right-wing dictatorships ostracized by Washington. Brazil is the ge^litical (Continued on Page B)
Meredith College Student Newspaper
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Nov. 12, 1980, edition 1
2
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75