opinions
tr.WMf
Scouting for better representation
Be prepared.
In the true spirit of the Boy Scouts of
America, the University Faculty Senate is
urging the University Board of Trustees to
allow the University community a more
active role throughout its next presidential
selection. before incoming University
President Bryce Jordan even takes office.
The process that selected Jordan began in
1981 when the Presidential Search and
Screen Committee, composed of 15 rep
resentatives of the University community,
was formed to reduce the list of presidential
candidates to a workable number for the
Presidential,Selection Committee.
From a pool of 301 candidates, the Search
Committee recommended 15 to the Selec
tion Committee, which was made up of nine
trustees. At that point, input from the Uni
versity community stopped.
Now the Faculty Senate has requested, by
a resolution, that for the next presidential
search, the trustees again form a presi-.
dential search committee of administra
tors, faculty members and students.
Although the last Search Committee in
cluded members from each group, a com
mittee of 15 is hardly representative of 64
administrators, 3,062 faculty members and
nearly 53,000 students.
For the next presidential search, a larger
committee is needed to bring more input
and expertise to the process. Penn State is a
large" and diverse university. It needs a
large and diverse body representing it when
presidential selection time rolls around.
When Jordan was selected, three final
candidates were interviewed by the Selec
tion Committee only. None of those who
were deemed responsible enough to trim
names from the list of 301 even knew who
those final three were.
Worse yet, the group that was supposedly
the most representative of the University
community also wasn’t allowed to question
the prospective presidents on their views of
the University, its policies or its students.
For these reasons, the senate is also
urging the trustees to allow the search
daily Collegian
Friday, June 17, 1983
©1983 Collegian Inc.
Suzanne M. Cassidy
Judith Smith
Editor Business Manager
The Daily Collegian’s editorial opin
ion is determined by its Board of
Opinion, with the editor holding
final responsibility. Opinions ex
pressed on the editorial pages are
not necessarily those of The Daily
Collegian, Collegian Inc. or The
committee or its selected representatives to
participate in the selection of those candi
dates who are interviewed, and to partici
pate in the interviews.
Ideally, interviews should be conducted
publicly with the final three candidates. The
University community would then be able to
assure itself that it was getting a president
who is both competent and concerned about
Penn State. Also, the prospective presidents
could learn more about Penn State people
and their attitudes.
Jordan defended the board’s secretive
method of selecting a president, saying he
would not have been interested in the job
had he been subject to public interviews. He
said he was happy with his job with the
University of Texas System and he did not
want to “broadcast to the world” that he
was looking for another position.
However, while discretion and confiden
tiality may be needed to assure that the best
candidates for University president come
forward, they should not in any way li,mit
input from the University community in the
final selection process.
The faculty senate believes the Search
Committee should be able to offer its recom
mendations to the Selection Committee con
cerning the the final selection of the next
president. Because the selection of the Uni
versity president very much affects the
entire University community, a more active
role for the search committee is essential.
Board of Trustees President Walter J.
Conti has called the senate’s resolution ill
timed: Jordan won’t take office for another
two weeks.
But if the University community is to
have more say in the next presidential
selection, then it should request more input
while-the memory of the last selection is
fresh in everyone’s minds. Asking for more
input now shows foresight on the part of the
faculty senate.
The Boy Scouts may be just a group of
kids, but they preach a valuable lesson that
hasn’t been wasted on the Faculty Senate.
Pennsylvania State University.
Collegian Inc., publishers of The
Daily Collegian and related publica
tions, is a separate corporate insti
tution from Penn State.
Board of Editors Editorial Editor.
Marcy Mermel; News Editor: Rosa
Eberly; Sports Editor: John Sever
ance; Photo Editor: Thomas Swarr;
Arts Editor: Ron Crow; Assistant
Arts Editor: Ron Yeany; Campus
Editor, Alecia Swasy; Town Editor:
Mike Netherland; Copy Editors:
Dana Buccilli, Tom Sakell; Weekly
Collegian Managing Editor: Brian
Bowers; Weekly Collegian Assis
tant Managing Editor: Lori Musser.
Board of Managers Assistant
Business Manager: Valerie Plame;
Office Manager: Colleen Waters;
Sales Manager: Terri Alvino; Layout
Coordinator: Kimberly Fox; Crea
tive Director: Lori Hitz; Marketing
Manager: Beverly . Sobel;. National
Ad Manager: Kimberly Fox.
About the Collegian: The Daily
Collegian and The Weekly Colle
gian are published by Collegian
Inc., an independent, non-profit
corporation with a board of direc
tors composed of students, faculty
and professionals. Students of The
Pennsylvania State University write
and edit both papers and solicit
advertising material for them.
(Stasia* us-r»us.'47»
*weLk first the/ voted fbt? -the freeze, meM -wey voted TbR iue MX /
reader opinion
The real No. 1
Almost everyone can recognize this situation. It s Jan. 2.
When people finally get over their New Year’s hangover,
the most common gripe seems to be, “Who is No. 1?”
After the New Year’s Eve and Day Sugar, Rose and Cotton
Bowls, it sometimes requires a mathematician hours of
derivations just to figure out who is in the running for the
National Championship.
However, sometimes this problem doesn’t exist. This
year the two top teams squared off against each other in
the Sugar Bowl, and there was no question that whichever
team won would be the National Champ and the loser
would be second. But I am sure there are still many
supporters of Southern Methodist University who feel
their team should have been No. 1 owing to their record,
which was the best in college football this year. But we can
only speculate on what might happen in a Penn State-SMU
match-up because the two teams did not play during the
regular season and there is only one post season game in
college football.
It is a very intense moment for the Penn State tan.
Everyone sits around the holy televison nervously sipping
his or her beers. But on the other side of the country sit the
faithful SMU fans, dejected and somber. I wouldn’t be
surprised if most of them are not even watching the game.
The two top teams are squaring off, but SMU has a better
record than both of them and no one but SMU fans cares.
But who can they complain to? There must be some way to
The Daily Collegian
Friday, June 17, 1983
alleviate this problem of uncertainty as to who should
really be the National Champion in college football.
A pro football fan would never have trouble in telling
you who the No. 1 team is. At the end of the regular
season, instead of playing one bowl game as in college, the
top eight teams in the NFL enter the playoffs and play
against each other (single elimination) until only the top
two teams are left. This match-up is the only “bowl
game,” the Super Bowl; it leaves no question of who the
' “World Champ” is.
Many people have been suggesting for years that the
playoff system be used in college football. One of the
biggest advocates of this drastic change is our own Joe Pa
(Joe Paterno). As the system exists, orily a mere coin
cidence when making up the schedules several years ago
could result in the top teams playing each other this year.
Except for the bowl game - the only’game determined
during the season a potential National Champ could
play all of the “grandma” teams during the regular
season, and not be given credit for playing tough teams.
I am sure that a post-season playoff system would solve
this problem and determine exactly who the National
Champ should be. There would be less controversy and we
would not have to depend on the UPI and AP polls to
decide for us who the No. 1 team is.
Stuart B. Sacks, 3rd-science
June 16
I: |j; i
f I! !
m
: I I
reader opinion
Unverifiable
I’m writing concerning an article
printed in The Daily Collegian a few
weeks ago about the Nuclear Freeze
bill.
The column was in the Contrast
section of the Collegian on April 21
and titled, “Nuclear freeze first step
to peace.” John Dougherty, the au
thor, states that a freeze is what
people want, that it is verifiable and
that without it the arms race will
continue indefinitely.
“The freeze is what people want,”
Dougherty says. But if a freeze is
what everybody wants, why is it such
an issue? The freeze outlined in Doug
herty’s column had, at the time,
nearly 40 proposed amendments and
caused one of the longest debates in
Congress in years.' And if people
* laPyiuMt 4 BdasKto
Tonight at the • Jmy •
"ptoviwi. wed
The
Spectres
Hot from Harrisburg!
Shows at Bellringer
5:30 and 10:30 Happy Hours
THE CAMPOS LOOP BOS SYSTEM
WILL NOT BE IN OPERATION BORING
THE 1983 SOMMER TERM
Bus service will resume for the
1983 fall semester on Sunday
, ' . August 21, 1983 at 12:00 noon.
wanted the freeze so badly one would
think there would have been immense
pressure on Congress to pass the bill.
But there wasn’t. Mr. Dougherty is
correct in saying! that people do want
a freeze, but not everybody wants this
particular freeze.
The reason that this bill presented
such a controversy is that it has some
potential flaws that could threaten
American security. For instance it is,
as Dougherty stated, essential for a
freeze to be verifiable if it is to be
effective. Both advocates and oppo
nents agree to this, Dougherty point
ed out that William Colby believes the
freeze to be verifiable. Granted the
former head of the CIA would be well
informed on such matters, but there
are a number of politicians, such as
President Reagan, former Secretary
of State Alexander Haig and Sen.
Henry Jackson (D-Washington), tp
name a few, who are not convinced.
Because it was not stated in the
column, I will assume that Dougherty
is referring to the Satellite Detection
System in which a satellite can use
radio waves to determine the number
of missiles that exist in both Russia
and the United States. There is a
suspicion in this system that the parts
of a nuclear warhead could be built
and as long as they aren’t assembled
into an actual missile, they won’t be
detected. While William Colby would
know as well as anyone whether the
freeze is verifiable, there are too
many doubts for one man to state
categorically one way or the other.
But let’s assume for the moment
that William Colby is right and the
freeze is verifiable. Mr. Dougherty
never deals with the issue of parity.
THE
ALLIANCE
CHRISTIAN
FELLOWSHIP
CoiTlpUS Worship 50fViC© yyg Assembly Hall
Wednesday Night Fellowship °'°
For more information call Pastor Dove Janssen 237-7991
No one is really sure how equal the
United States and Russia are in nu
clear armaments. Freeze proponents
claim that there is parity and that it’s
time to stop the arms race, while
opponents argue that Russia has an
advantage over us and the freeze
would hamper the United States in
negotiations. There is some evidence
to indicate the latter observation to
be more accurate. Jim Hoagland of
the Washington Post Service reported
the deepest level of debate here (Eu
ropean arms negotiations) is over
Soviet intentions.
Rarely voiced publicly, there is a
view that Moscow has little interest in
reaching an interim agreement at
Geneva that would allow the United
States to begin deployment while
establishing a mutually balanced
ceiling for medium range rockets.
H ® Domino’s Pizza Inc. 1983
■ Our drivers carry less than $ lO SOUTH: 234-5655
I Limited delivery area 421 Rear E. Beaver Ave.
And according to retired Air Force
General Brent Scowcroft, “The Rus
sians have a hard-target kill capabili
ty (an ability to destroy U.S. missiles
in their silos) that we don’t have;
there is no incentive for them to give
it up.’’
Even in Mr. Dougherty’s own argu
ment for the bill one can see how
dangerous a freeze can be. In the
section where he shows how the arms
race has gone full circle he states in
the early '7os the Soviets new ABM
system had made our current missile
system obsolete. Dougherty then ex
plains that the United States designed
the MIRV system to overcome Rus
sia’s ABMs.
Later, he states, “If a freeze had
been instituted in the early ’7os, then
MIRVs might never have been devel
oped because they couldn't have been
V IB'S
v -
REHEAT OF
Not some of this... Not some of that... Not any
special groups or special purchase racks...
JUST A PLAIN GOOD OLD-FASHIONED STOREWIDE SALE!
STOREWIDE CLEARANCE OF ALL SUMMER
MERCHANDISE AT FANTASTIC REDUCTIONS
COOL 30% to a FROSTY 50% off
ALLPURPOSE COATS
DRESSES
SKIRTSUITS
SWIMSUITS
STARTS TODAY THURSDAY
Open tonight until 9:00
So Muck fo Ckoooe Flow!! So Muck lo Stme!!
Be Tml Fot Ike Best M Boik
ttUje_ (Carriage
2 FREE 16 oz. Cups of
Pepsi with any Pizza
one coupon per pizza
expires 6/22/83
from a
PANTS BAGS
SKIRTS BLOUSES
SHORTS LINGERIE
TOPS ROBES
The Daily Collegian Friday. June 17, 1983 —7
tested.” Dougherty implies that this
would be a good situation but he
forgets that without MIRV the United
States’ missile system would have
been rendered incompetent by the
Russian ABMs. Does this sound like
security?
The Russians have shown, through
their recent history, that they are not
to be trusted.
To enter into an argument as
vital to world peace as the nuclear
freeze with Russia without knowing
all the facts and having all the points
specified, could threaten both Ameri
can and worldwide security. Mr.
Dougherty's article failed to prove
that the United States knows enough
about Russia’s military situation to
make a nuclear freeze effective at
this time.
Steve Wilson, 3rd-physics
HGATE...
Iress with a country setting
Ing Special Spring and Summer Rateatl
tdroom Three Bedroom
Us Townhouses
jas Forced air healing - BAir conditioning
IWalMo-uall carpeting B Cable fV
/uUv equipp’d kitchens: BSoundprool construction
pishuaihtr. , f W a «alor' :ou ,
rrceier. range, disposal.
t.oli» f coordinated
SOUTHGATE
801 A Southgate Drive
State College, PA. 16801
234-0333
NORTH: 237-1414
1104 N. Atherton