TltA CwtJofiMJOb ^owumjJL
The Student Newspaper of the University of North Carolina at Cliarlotte
Volume XI, Number 24
Charlotte, North Carolina
March 9, 1976
P/iorr and Verdinek in Presidential runoff
All for or agaiiisl candidates win
PIRG victorious in landslide
ByDougLerner Carrouth (WVFN Chairiiiani wifhHr,.w
By Doug Lerner
Tallies from the major spring
elections, the largest paper ballot ever
held on the UNCC campus, show us that
the North Carolina Public Interest
Research Group, NC PIRG, has won
overwhelming student approval with
more than 65% of the students voting to
fund the statewide consumer and
environmental group through a two dollar
increase in the student activity feel Other
results have presidential candidates Bob
Verdinek and Rickey Pharr heading for a
run-off election next Wednesday and
Thursday, and approval of the new
Student Constitution (see complete
election resultselsewhereon this page).
By far, the question concerning the
student body the most was the funding of
NC PIRG. More students (992) cast votes
on the PIRG question than on any other
campus-wide decision - out polling the
presidential race and the new student
constitution.
A spokesman for the student group
, “We thank everyone w'ho gave us
support throughout the campaign, and of
course we thank the student body for
expressing confidence in us and for
reaffirming the students’ role as a
constructive and participating citizen in
the community.”
Nine out of ten student polling places
reported in favor of PIRG; even the
Commuter Lounge where PIRG met with
its most vocal opposition voted its
approval of funding the student consumer
group. A breakdown of the polling places
and the percentage of students voting for
PIRG are: Commuter Lounge 58.6%,
Student Government Office 66%, Rowe
Building 30.2%, Smith Building 54.6%,
Gymnasium 100%, Dorm 72 (Scott Hall)
71.4%, Dorm 73 (Holshouser Hall)
76.8%, Sanford Hall 56%, Moore Hall
62.1%and the Dorm Cafeteria 69.8%.
Assuming approval of the students’
decision, funding for PIRG will begin this
fall.PIRG hasbeen notified that President
of the Student Body, Jamie Stemple, has
written a letter to Chancellor Colvard
informing him of the vote and requesting
a meeting with student. PIRG
representatives to discuss speedy
ratification of the vote.
in other elections, no clear decision
was made by the student body to who
our next President will be. Bob Verdinek
received a plurality of the votes (311) and
wckey Pharr came in a strong second
(214). The run-off between the two
candidates will be heldnext week. Neither
candidate could be reached for comment
on what issues they will stress this week
in the run-off decision and none of the
losing candidates have come out in favor
ot ei^er Pharr or Verdinek yet.
, I'he student constitution, after failing
y one vote in an extremely low voter
ainout last semester, won ratification by
e student body in a campus wide
got the most votes next to
G. Terry Fulbright, designer of the
MW constitution expressed his delight at
e decision and expressed hopes for
Pae y ratification by the Chancellor.
® constitution takes effect
Students wanting a copy
““W go to the Student Government
ices in the Cone University Center.
The only other student wide
4 es ion, other than ‘for’ or ‘against’
™es, was for the new Chairman of the
University Program Board. John Knight
Vi* for re-election to
•Chairman Greg Reynolds in a 452 .-
knLi,?‘e Reynolds and
anrt V support for each other
iha II maintain an active role in
University Program Board.-
Tmt . rv for office, Davis
LanevK?!!“^®"l, Court), Lisa
y (Student Media Board) and Henry
Carrouth (WVFN Chairman) withdrew
from the race for various reasons. Trotter
also resigned as Vice-President of the
student body after citing “growing
inability to work with' Student
Legislature.”
All candidates running on ‘for’ or
against ballots won, as unopposed
candidates always do. Terry Fulbright,
Chairman of the Elections Board, and
many of the ballot counters who worked
from 7:30 pm until after 7:00 the next
morning counting returns were inclined
to propose immediate acceptance of
students running unopposed in the
future. No student has ever lost in a ‘for’
or ‘against’ election, although many
referendum questions have failed in the
past.
Run-offs for the Student Body
President will be held next Wednesday
and Thursday. Times and places for the
polls will be posted throughout the
campus.
Nader speaks to University community;
Calls for ‘Control over technolo^y^
By Brad Rich
Tuesday, March 2nd at 12:30 pm on
the UNCC Gymnasium, Ralph Nader,
America s number one consumer
advocate”, spoke to a crowd of between
two and three thousand on the subject of
“Technology and Society-An Inquiry
into Values.”
Nader’s appearance was sponsored by
the University Forum Council, and is part
of an annual program which has in the
past featured such speakers as Henry
Kissinger, James Rouse and Charles
Kuralt., The second speaker in this year’s
program was Sydney Harris.
Robert Coleman, Chairman of the
Forum Council, opened the. program with
a few welcoming remarks, saying this was
the 11th forum held in conjunction with
Photo courtesy of Development Office
Ralph Nader.
the passing of legislature which brought
UNCC into the state university system.
He then introduced Dwight
Feemster, of NC-PIRG and UNCC, who
in turn introduced Nader.
Nader opened with a brief discussion
of his overall message for the day. “My
mission,” he said, “Is to illuminate an
area of technology ...to reassert
democratic control over technology.”
Nader cited several major areas of
technology, the first of which was the
automobile industry. He said he first
became interested in the auto industry
while hitchiking across the country as a
college undergraduate. While riding with a
truck driver, he noticed a clothes hook
behind the driver’s head which came
dangerously close to him with each bump
on the road. “I didn’t think my discovery
was of Einsteinean caliber,” he said, “but
it did make me start thinking.”
During his first year at law school,
Nader spent some time studying auto
accidents. He was surprised auto
accidents were viewed as “driver to driver
combat” and no importance was placed
on the effects of the highway or the
vehicle. With this in mind, he began to
write a paper on the subject, and started
asking questions of people in the
industry.
One question he asked was what
reason there was for the tailfins on autos
during this time period. The industry
answered the tailfins satisfied a necessary
aerodynamic- function, but then they
were later phased out. “Why?” asked
Nader, “Did the winds change?”
From his paper, entitled
“Automotive Design and the Law,”
Nader learned two lessons;
one)information in most studies is
dominated by the producer, and two)the
Spring election results
student Body President
Robert Ainsworth 34
Fritz the Cat 151
Teresa Hammer 90
Rickey Pharr* 214
Pat Rose 103
Bob Verdinek* 311
Geoff Wallwork 71
Carolina Journal Editor
Michael Evans and Brad Rich*
Sanskrit Editor
Beth Griffith*
Student Body Representatives
Student Media Board
Kelly Campbell*
Susan Sluss*
Bill Strieker*
WVFN Chairman
Coleman Thompson*
Jhairman, University Program Board
John Knight
Greg Reynolds*
Vice-Chariman, University Program Board
Mike Doyne*
Student Body Representatives
University Program Board
Sid Cameron*
Nita Julian*
Legislature Seats
David Moreau-Architecture*
Debbie Powell-Econ and Business Admin.*
Mike Rankin- Econ and Business Admin.*
Dick Garrett-Econ and Business Admin.
Rusty Gilmore-Engineering*
Angela Threatt-Nursing*
Mike Adams-Nursing
Frank Alexander-Social and Behavior Science'
Bobby Flowers-Social and Behavior Science
Bobby Roberts-Social and Behavior Science*
Damon Smith-Science and Math*
Jeff Hall-Sophomore Class Pres.*
Andy Ringler-Sophomore Class Pres.
Randy Severs-SophomoreClass Pres.
Linda Fowler-Hunior Class Pres.
Doug Love-Junior Class Pres.*
‘Denotes Winner except in the case of President
in which Pharr and Verdinek will be in run-off.
product is almost never evaluated from
the consumer point of view.
Nader scorned the “Totally worthless
and costly ornamentation on autos
that....protect the vehicles from
pedestrians. Thousands of lives could be
saved by a few simple engineering changes
made almost at no cost. We must develop
a more humane technology,” he added,
“One without ornamental pornography.
It is your right in a democracy, to ask
questions and get answers.”
Nader also discussed industrial
disease, saying there are over 100,000
deaths a year caused by work-related
diseases. “Some of these are not even
recognized as diseases.” he said. He then
quoted statistics which said street crime
accounts for only about 11,000 deaths per
year. ‘‘Industrial disease is silent
cumulative violence. Just because it
doesn’t pinch doesn’t mean that il
.doesn’t hurt.”
From there, he moved to tlie energy
problem, especially dealing with atomic
energy. “We are fooling with nature on a
global scale,” he said, “And nature
abused beyond a certain point turns on
its abusers,” He also said, “The busing
controversy is like a spring picnic
compared to the effects the atomic-
energy industry will have on the future.”
Three alternatives to atomic energy
were suggested by Nader, the first being
energy conservation. “We waste more
energy than anyone in the world,’.’ he
said. “If this country were more efficient,
we could double'our economy without
using any more energy.”
He also suggested more prudent use
of our abundant fossil fuels, and the
development of solar technology. “Why
hasn’t solar energy been developed?” he
asked. Because the oil companies don’t
own the sun. It is disagreeable to Exxon,
Standard Oil, etc. Also solar energy has a
nasty habit of going straight to your
homes, bypassing all of the utility
companies.”
Next Nader addressed the drug
industry, saying drugs are not adequately
tested. One example he cited was red dye
number 2 and red dye number 40, which
both have been removed (finally) from
the market after being linked to the
occurence of cancer. He said, “The public
thinks products are safe because the
government puts them on the market.
The companies, however, think of profits
and sales first, and want producer power
over the government.”
Nader endorsed PIRG, saying
“Student researchers can be very effective
because they are idealistic and can ask
questions that older people won’t.” He
said the biggest problem on campuses
today IS boredom, and PIRG helps by
“challenging you with real-life situations
that demand deep analytic solutions. The
University is a unique chance to
experiment...pioneer and take chances
You may not have the opportunity in a
job because the stakes might be too high
in a |ob.” ^
49ers receive NIT bid
(see story on page 12