our involvement and supporting
Crime in America it, all limits have disap
peared.
by James Mullen
Perhaps the biggest ques
tion in the minds of many
Americans and particularly
many Congressman is "What is
to become of the President,
now that Congress is scheduled
to•hear testimony as to whether
or not impeachment should be
attempted?" Well I have my
own opinion on this, But be
yond. this, and somewhat TO•
3.ated, is the question "What
is to become of the Presiden
cy?"
With Watergate, ITT, the
Palk Industry, end plumbing
talk, along with tapes that do.
not talk, has come a close
scrutiny of the highest of
fice. There has also, in my
opinion, come a seige,upon
that office. This seige,
though, is not based upon its
merits; rather it is based
upon the fall from popularity
of the President.
There are many who are
not too happy with Nixon at
this point and they therefore
support attempts to limit his
powers and make him more re-
spbnsible to the people. But
is this good and can future
Presidents operate under these
limitations? Or will history
show that Congress's limiting
of the Presidential powers as
they held Nixon over a barrel
to be a poor move?
One move by Congress that
I feel the test of time will
reveal as being poor, is the
War Powers Bill. This bill
presents an instance in which
'Congress should have been more
careful. In this bill Con-
gress has limited the Presi
dent to only 60 days in which
he is allowed to employ U.S.
troops without approval. In
effect, the U.S. would have to
decide within 60 days whether
or not to virtually declare
war. Had such a proceechire
been in effect when we first
entered Vietnam, we might well
have wound up fighting Red
China. Why do I say this?
Because after 60 days, if Con
gress had decided that the U.S.
should stay in, and after con
sidering what the times and
events surrounding our initial
involvement were, I believe
that involvement could easily
become unlimited. Why? With
Congress now, determining
Whereas once the
President waged war and Congress
supported it provinding a check
and balance, now Congress
wages war and supports it,
unchecked. There is also
another aspect to this prob
lem; now with war as unpopular
as it is, Congress might hesi
tate to use U.S. troops at all.
This might severely weaken
all committments the U.S. has
to other nations.
Another proposal being
discussed in Congress is a one
or two year presidential
term. This I feel will also
hurt any future President
greatly. It would in effect
hold the President liable to
every whim and fancy of the
people. I once heard it said
by our own Dr. F.W. Aurand,
that history shows that there
has never been an effective
President who was 'very popular
during his time in office.
What I am saying here is that,
with a one year term system,
history shows that a good
President would not last. You
might doubt this argument, but a
close look back in time should
prove it. An alternative men
tioned by Congress is limiting
a President to only one four
year term. On this proposal I
take a more neutral view, as I
can see both benefit and de
triment balancing each other.
Finally I would like to
express my feelings on the
proposed public funding of
campaigning for the highest
office. I can say that lam
in favor of this point. I can
see where a lot of work valid
be involved, and I can see
good cause to question its
constitutionality, but I do
believe it would be a way
to bring about fairer elections.
Candidates would have to once
again run on their merits
rather than the best or most
expensive advertising. No
longer will there be
books on "selling the Presi
dent." My last point is that
such funding will cause bal
anced campaigns with the de
ciding factors being past per
fOrtance and the issues, and
not money.
What has been given is my
opinion; I would be happy to
discuss and exchange opinions
with anyone.
COll - : A , 1 ,- • t 1 , 1 974 - Page Three
The key word here, of
course, is Revolution, for we
are considering the annual
record-breaking amount of New
Year's Revolutions attempted
by various sociological ag
gregates. These phenomena
are sometimes referred to as
Resolutions, but this is a
misnomer, for obvious reasons.
No one does any resolving;
what we engage in is revol
ting. This excludes, of
G: . :-Irse. persons who protest
employers' deCisions to "crack
down," by resorting to . Coun -
ter-Revolution, and drugstore
alerks, who react to the new
wave of aspirin sales by in
citing Over-Counter-Revolutions.
There are rumors that
students of Highacres are also
joining this trend towards
self-improvement. When asked
the organization's musical
plans for the coming year, cane
HCC member replied, "Well,
(of chorus), we will try to
bar the measure y2oposing to
take whole steps to tone a
new musical scale, called the
''S scale.' We resolve to es
calate our efforts, without
half a rest." This notion has
caused discord among even
Well-Tempered musicians.
continued page seven
QUIBBLING
by Deborah Berger
There are certain days
each year when people all over
the world engage in a special
kind of record-breaking.
These special records we break
are sometimes of an absolutely
revolting mature. However,
those of us who are scientifi
cally minded can calculate the
probability that each person
who attempts to break a revol
ting record will succeed. This
is easily accomplished with
this mathematical Theorem;
TEP3= Y(RPM)X7N+C, where
P P is the Probability of
Each Person; Yis the Year in
Question (in our case, 1 974);
RPM is Revolutions ihcited per
Minute; N is the Number of
persons in the sample; and C
is a constant, the sum of the
words per sentence in the
first five pages of Toynbee's
A Study of Histo .