Newspapers / Daily Tar Heel (Chapel … / Dec. 6, 1994, edition 1 / Page 8
Part of Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.) / 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
8 Tuesday, December 6,1994 cTbp lattij (Ear Mtd Kelly Ryan editor World Wide Web Electronic Edition: f2> ■■ Established 1893 90 101 Years of Editorial Freedom Right the Wrongs You Make Johnny Harris should take himself out of the search for UNC’s next chancellor and remove the stigma associated with his heavy-handed and illegal practices as chairman of the chancel lor search committee. Harris may have avoided a humiliating court battle for having violated the N.C. Open Meet- ings Law by refusing to dis close the times and locations of the search committee meet ings since it began looking for Chancellor Paul Hardin’s successor. Harris announced Tues day in a statement that, from now on, the search commit tee would announce all meet ings 48 hours in advance, as required by the law. But this about-face doesn’t change the fact that Harris’ iron fist has hidden a committee so inept that the journalists, former journalists and lawyers on it couldn’t even figure out a basic N.C. law. The Open Meetings Law requires public bodies to announce their meet ings to the public, even if they proceed to close the meeting once it has started. Harris should resign as chairman of the com mittee; then, to regain credibility and avoid other lawsuits relating to open records and open meetings law, the committee should: ■ Announce and give notice of all future meetings; ■ Release all minutes of meetings since the committee convened, expunging only informa tion that could identify candidates in the search; ■ Release the travel and expense records of all search committee members; and ■ Make it clear who is the clerk of the com mittee and ensure the clerk’s availability to an swer questions and provide information and minutes. An Easy Suit to Lose Local media have written a request for min utes of the search committee meetings. In his last action as chairman of the committee, Harris should comply with the request and then turn his post over to someone more credible. Even though Harris now says he will comply with the law, the public still has no guarantee that the search committee has conducted its business in a legitimate manner until they see the minutes from the 9-month-old search process. A Lame Defense Increase One of President Clinton’s fast-fading cam paign promises was to drastically reduce federal defense spending in the wake of the “end of the Cold War.” For the first half of his presidency, the promise looked like reality as $29 billion was slashed. Now, in a surprising volte-face, Clinton has pledged $25 billion in a 6-year boost to defense spending. The zigzag move comes fast after recent Republican midterm election victo ries and is perceived as an attempt to assemble GOP support behind a faltering Democrat presi dent with a lame-duck Congress. Clinton is looking to promote mainstream populist policy. Increasing spending on defense will improve relations between the executive branch and the military leadership as well as appease irate defense contractors who fear to cut more jobs in a threatened industry. Further, a significant portion of the increase will go to raise soldier’s pay, a move that will slake fears Clinton has for his safety in the light of Sen. Jesse Helms’ accusations last month. But these are merely superficial positives that amount to hasty midterm electioneering. More profoundly, Clinton’s announcement represents his tendency for unsound policy, and it will lead to deeper budget deficit problems in the future. Question: If anew study found that abortion might involve previously unknown dangers, should women have access to this information? Answer: According to some abortion activ ists, no. Women don’t deserve to know. In the wake of a recent 7-year study finding that having an abortion raises the risk of breast cancer by 50 percent, partisan politics is locked in a battle to suppress these results from the public. Whether the results of the study will stand the test of time is not the issue. Women need facts to make good decisions and are forced to rely on what research is available, no matter how con troversial. The great irony is that the study’s author, Janet Daling of the Fred Hutchinson Cancer Research Center, actually suppressed the study’s findings after originally saying that she was “absolutely appalled that politics [was] entering into the science of this study.” Daling said she “didn’t want to alarm any one” by reporting that women under 18 who had Not only has the committee not announced any of its meetings since Sept. 22, it held other unannounced meetings earlier in the process. Harris forced his committee to go much deeper into secrecy than the logic of respecting the privacy of potential candidates demanded. His autocratic leadership style has tainted the search, and the current uproar over his abuse of the Open Meetings Law has thrown his credibil ity into severe doubt. Even UNC-system Presi dent C.D. Spangler won’t come to Harris’ aid. While Harris says Spangler gave the committee legal advice on how to conduct its meetings, Spangler has responded in the press that he did nothing of the sort and that no one in his office has advised the search committee. Incompetent Chairman, Tainted Search If Harris never even contacted legal counsel before undertaking the search, that’s a damning enough statement of his ethical standards. He says people don’t understand the importance of the confidentiality in such a sensitive search. What Harris doesn’t understand is the impor tance of communicating with the University community and obeying the spirit and letter of the N.C. Open Meetings and Open Records laws. The committee is supposed to start every meeting public and then from there declare a closed session, then reconvene in open session to adjourn. But the fact remains that he has cut the public out of the absolute minimum of information it is due concerning the chancellor search, and there is definitely grounds for a lawsuit. A lawsuit against the search committee would hold up its work at a crucial time and use up taxpayer money. If media organizations won, the suit would invalidate the work of the search committee since Sept. 22, forcing it back to the drawing board. Instead of putting the search committee and the University through a lawsuit that might scare off potential chancellors, Harris should resign and allow the search committee to take anew and better direction. Harris’ resignation won’t wipe clean the search committee’s dirty slate. Accompanied by a re lease of the committee’s minutes, however, Har ris’ departure could set the search committee on track to regaining public trust. Discrepancies in the search process would come to light once the committee’s records became public. JOHNNY HARRIS With Helms’ looming appointment to the chairmanship of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee and his promise of a more isolation ist international stance, raising defense spending is definitely amiss. But when the move comes on the back of recent U.S. failures to effect change in the Baltic states and Somalia, it is little short of illogical. Add to this Newt Gingrich’s criticisms of U.S. involvement with the United Nations, and his support forthe “Contract With America” that would ban U.S. forces from being under U.N. command, then Clinton’s newpolicy makes no sense at all. It is obvious that the U.S. Congress has no intention of involving itself with any interna tional military missions, whoever sponsors them, and that the future of its involvement in the United Nations is questionable, particularly when it has more than $ 100 million in unpaid member ship fees. Under these circumstances, a boost to defense spending is a move in completely the wrong direction and, in time, will lead to an increased budget deficit as the military shows its financial inefficiency. We can only hope that Congress sees the stupidity of the proposed in creases and votes down Clinton’s lame midterm electioneering attempts. Pro-Knowledge had an abortion after the eighth week of preg nancy had an 800 percent greater risk of develop ing breast cancer before the age of 45. No matter how controversial the abortion issue, politics should not be allowed to influence the availability to the public of scientific findings that could directly influence a person’s health. If partisan politics is allowed to influence this study in any way, there remains a danger that research ers in the future might allow potential contro versy to deter them from researching sensitive subjects. Roe vs. Wade was passed to keep abortion safe and legal. If the pro-choice and pro-life movements truly are fighting for the welfare of all women, they will butt out of this issue and realize that their attempt to politicize these find ings does nothing but hurt those they wish to protect. Under the law, a woman is guaranteed the right to choose. Allowing her full access to any pertinent scientific information that might affect her body is and should be a fundamental right. Hunasag Cambinis editorial page editor Am; Rniak university editor Chris Nicbols CITY EDITOR Jenny Heimen STATE 4 NATIONAL EDITOR Justin Scheef SPORTS EDITOR Jon Goldberg features editor Wendy Mitchell arts/diversions editor Hofly Stepp special assignments editor Kathryn Sherer COPY DESK EDITOR Jennifer Neckyfarow copy desk editor Katie Cannon photography EDITOR Robert Anderson graphics editor Jake Mac Nelly EDITORIAL CARTOON EDITOR EDITORIAL THE, SINGLE SUPERSTAR THEORV J kernes jJ]mSSk PftOFESSIONftL S NSK£TeM_l_ B&SKET6M.I. TpF WITH -• COINCIDENCE?^ Two More Years Like These, and I’ll Lose My Mind I wish I didn’t read the newspaper. If I didn’t, I wouldn’t be so scared. But unfortunately, since I work at one, I have to, and what I see terrifies me. 1994 has marked a victory for exclu sion and indifference as the ruling ideas of our day. From UNC’s campus to the national political scene, a realistic form of “screw the other guy” has replaced the hopeful climate of two years ago. In 1992, students were mounting an intense struggle for a freestanding black cultural center. No matter what you thought of the BCC, if you were on campus you had to be impressed with the sheer energy, dedication and persistence of the protesters who worked toward their goal for an entire exhausting year. Those students wanted something, and they didn’t doubt their ability to be heard and make an impact. On the national scene, 12 years of laissez faire Republican government were giving way to a vigorous Bill Clinton, who promised to return government to the common American. At the time, no one thought Bill Clinton would make a perfect president; but some of us hoped his unique brand of vivacious idealism and good old-boy politicking would break the sluggish rhythm of Washington. In North Carolina, higher education seemed to be entering a renaissance, with voters sup porting a large-scale capital improvements bond that would make necessary improvements on campuses across the state. The bipartisan motto two years ago, on the local and national level, was “take power and make a difference.” Students on campus, resi dents of Chapel Hill, and the electorate that responded to Bill Clinton and Ross Perot seemed to have rejected business as usual. But times they are a-changin’ back, and the great optimism has given way to traditional power-mongering. Events of the past year have dulled the opti mism of 1992 and raised new questions about the nature of the American citizen. Does he care about anyone otherthan himself? Or has America become the world frontier, where it’s each man for himself? On a grand scale, the ’94 elections had the most disturbing ramifications. Conservatives proclaimed a rejection of liberal values and a return to the family and corporate values of the Reagan years. But the brand of politician that gained power in 1994 wasn’t the old Reagan Confessions of a Dark Lady: It’s All Society’s Fault As this is my last column (sniff), I guess it should be some form of apologia to explain why I decided to write, or how I could be so sinful as to tear into the moral fabric of Chapel Hill, or how many men I’ve actually slept with. However, all of these things are kinda boring, and if I’m not interested enough to write them, your interest would be even less. Instead, I am going to tell you about my recent revelation, about why 1 am what 1 am. It’s all society’s fault, and it’s time to set things straight. This epiphany struck me in the middle of my Shakespeare class, so I’ve decided to lay most of the blame for my condition on that Bastard Will. We were studying his sonnets, of which 20 or so tell the story of a Dark Lady (i.e. a brunette). This Dark Lady is quite the femme fatale; in modem day terms she’d probably be called a do me feminist. The speaker of Will’s sonnets has a mixed-up image of her, however, because (does this sound familiar) although she’s beautiful, he sees her sexiness as something evil, as manifested in her dark hair. Instead of merely following the contempo rary belief that “blond is beautiful,” Will verbal ized the fear of darkness, of brunettes, in these sonnets. And I have no doubt that these few sonnets have been the bane of every brunette’s life from that day on. Other folk have followed this tradition of evil dark-haired wenches. Can you imagine Scarlett O'Hara as a blonde? Or Natasha, from the Rocky and Bullwinkle show? Or Rizzo from “Grease”? The list of evil-doing, lascivious brunettes goes on forever from ancient times, with Cleopatra, to current times, with Brenda on 90210 (I swear I don’t watch that show, I did research). Blond female villains seem less con vincing, less powerful and certainly more doll like. Why? Because of those damned sonnets proclaiming for the world to read how sex crazed are brunettes, and how scary are their libidos. Make-believe characters follow this tradition conservative; it was anew animal alto gether, the politician par excellence who promised everything out of all sides of his mouth, while assur ing voters that power would not corrupt him. Americans showed a surprising form of political na ivete. Voters don’t mind corruption, fi- THANASSIS CAMBANIS EDITORIAL PAGE EDITOR nancial abuse or unethical behavior; otherwise they would have thrown miscreants like Dan Rostenkowski and Bob Packwood out of Con gress long ago. They say they don’t want government con trol. So what do they do? Elect a Republican old guard that has promised to do all it can to raise defense spending, bring prayer to schools, im pose term limits on themselves once they hold power in Congress—all this while cutting taxes and balancing the budget. Unrealistic expectations are made to be dashed, and America is heading for another hangover with the short-sighted, power-hungry senators and representatives now running Con gress. Instead of cleansing Congress of all the old incumbents, Americans created anew politi cian; the one who promises to exercise power for the good of the majority not of all the people —and as long as that power is absolute. At UNC, we’ve seen the same thing in a microcosm. After a year in which everyone be lieved they could affect University policy if they were willing to fight long enough, we’ve seen a return to the old-style heavy-handed politics. The members of the Board of Trustees have shown their true colors. After axing 24-hour visitation in 1993 be cause they weren’t asked about the policy first, they went on to approve it in 1994. The key concept seems to be “proper channels,” mean ing that if trustees like Johnny Harris and David Whichard, who haven’t been to college in de cades and probably haven’t stepped foot in a dorm or the Pit area in as many years, aren’t consulted, nothing will be allowed on campus. The BOT and the Board of Governors have as well. How many blond witch wigs are sold at Halloween? None; witches are traditionally seen as having long, dark, crazy hair, symbol izing their dark pacts/relations with Satan. My favorite ex ample comes from the old cartoon, “The Smurfs.” ?mmk i 'c ■■ \ [EANNEFUGATE STRAIGHT, NO CHASER When Gargamel first creates his evil minion, Smurfette, she has black, ratty-looking hair. Af ter Papa Smurf wins her over to the forces of Good, she’s magically transformed into, you guessed it, the blond, simpering, insipid darling we all recognize. (I think I really dated myself with this allusion.) They say that if kids watch violent shows, they try to emulate the violence that they see. When I was a kid, all the images of brunettes I saw led me to believe that necessarily brunettes must be a little more daring, manipulative and, well, loose than their light-haired peers. What could I do but give in to that image during my formative years and become what I am today? What could I do but write a column which continued this image of brunette wantonness? I know there’ll be objections to this generali zation. “What about Wonder Woman? She was a brunette and never did anything bad.” That, my friend, is where you’re wrong. They never showed what went on in the Halls of Justice after the fights went out. Wonder Woman wasn’t saving people 24-7, and neither were the rest of the (mostly male) superheroes. We all know from working closely in co-ed groups that “incest” goes on, and I’ve no doubt that some of the R & R that the superheroes engaged in was superheroic sex. I wonder if Wonder Woman used her lasso on Superman? Or, even kinkier, the Wonder Twins? Others might contend that the current image Stye Saily 3ar Heel quietly fought and delayed many measures; a nondiscrimination clause that would protect UNC employees on the basis of their sexual orientation, an auditing system that would better protect the integrity ofUNC’sfinances, the elimi nation of the SIOO meal-card minimum for stu dents living on campus. BOT Chairman Johnny Harris has led a chan cellor search process that would embarrass the CIA, the company’s recent fiascos notwithstand ing. “Taxpayers” concerned enough about ac countability and fiscal responsibility to fight for school board member LaVonda Burnette’s resig nation have stood by silently as UN C has poured thousands of dollars into fighting a 7-year-old discrimination suit by University Police officer Keith Edwards. Students have not raised their voice at chan cellor search forums they didn't attend or on surveys they haven’t filled out or on ballots they didn't bother to use. I see two overriding themes; people don’t care about politics or policies that don’t affect them directly, and traditionally disenfranchised groups are being quietly cut out of the picture. Some UNC administrators, and some politi cians, are working to make our country and our university more inclusive, more effective and more responsive. But the gains we won two years ago have been forgotten, and the same bureau crats who made things tick then are quietly and surely retaining their hold on power. Who’s to say? Maybe Johnny Harris will choose a chancellor who will dynamically lead UNC to new heights in education. Maybe the Board of Governors will give the faltering UNC system new direction, a concrete set of policies that can infuse it with a productive and coordinated mission. Maybe the Republican Congress won’t play partisan politics with an eye toward the 1996 presidential contest. That’s the kind of news I’d like to read in next year’s papers. But unless we all raise a collective voice—of credit where credit is due and of anger when things aren’t changing the way we want them to —the new year might not bring anything but more back-room decisions and a slow ero sion of individual rights. Thanassis Cambanis is a junior history major from Chapel Hill. of “evil” women seems to have taken a blond turn with Sharon Stone, Glenn Close and Ma donna as prime exemplars. As we don’t know what color Madonna’s hair really is (and she’s gone through quite an array), she doesn’t count. The other two are just aberra tions; the characters they played were evil enough that the hair color didn’t matter. The image of brunettes as more lascivious than blondes hasn’t changed significantly be cause of them. I’ve always been frustrated by this steadfast belief. A friend of mine has nicknamed me, “Femme," not as in Violent, but as in sex-crazed and manipulative. I asked him, “DearestM, why do you call me Femme and not call any of our other friends (who say the same things, do the same things/people) that?” “Because you look like one.” Quite simply, I’m a brunette, and therefore, a femme. The fact that I defended Mrs. Robinson’s lifestyle for an hour and a half the first time I met M might have something to do with it as well. In fact, I think that being a brunette has led me to drink a lot more than I should, in order to complete the image of wildness. So, to end my column, I’d like to give you a great recipe to use any time, but especially now as we celebrate the end of the semester: Long bland Iced Tea 1 oz. vodka 1 oz. fight rum 1 oz. gin 1/2 oz. grapefruit juice 1/2 oz. lemon juice 1/2 oz. grenadine Mix together over ice, in a big glass. You can add more/less liquor depending on your ballsiness. You can also quadruple the recipe to make a pitcher for you and your friends to share. Have a great Winter Break, and the next time you see me, I might be blond, or at least have reformed from my wanton ways. Jeanne Fugate is a junior English major from Ocala Fla.
Daily Tar Heel (Chapel Hill, N.C.)
Standardized title groups preceding, succeeding, and alternate titles together.
Dec. 6, 1994, edition 1
8
Click "Submit" to request a review of this page. NCDHC staff will check .
0 / 75