The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 46, No. 23, Ed. 1 Friday, March 20, 1959 Page: 4 of 8
eight pages : ill. ; page 21 x 14 in.View a full description of this newspaper.
Extracted Text
The following text was automatically extracted from the image on this page using optical character recognition software:
Four
THB THRESHER
FRIDAY, MARCH 20, lMt
Needed:
1600 Thinking People
This Saturday Rice students will be asked to ap-
prove a new student government. The new Constitu-
tion is a great improvement over the one now in ef-
fect. It involves two major changes designed to simpli-
fy the workings of student affairs. At present we
operate under a system which simply does not take the
Colleges into consideration. It was written when the
Colleges did not exist. Times have changed and a revi-
sion is necessary.
The new Constitution proposes a Student Senate
composed of twenty-one members. These members will
be chosen entirely from the colleges. Each college will
elect a delegate at large, and a delegate from the
sophomore or junior class. These people, along with
the college president, will represent the college at the
Student Senate. In this way, each of the classes and
each of the colleges will be adequately represented.
However, the Senate will be able to discuss inter-col-
lege matters and the old ICC versus the Student Coun-
cil problem will be eliminated. There will no longer be
a need for the ICC and it will cease to exist.
The Student Senate will have no real binding pow-
er over the colleges. In fact, regardless of what any
constitution says, no one has any power over the col-
leges except the Administration. The new Constitu-
tion has a better solution to the problem. It encour-
ages the colleges to bring their problems voluntarily
to, and settle them at, the Student Senate. Order and
v
cooperation will replace misunderstanding and confu-
sion.
It should be pointed out that this new Constitu-
tion was drawn up by a committee of whom the ma-
jority are seniors who have had a great deal of experi-
ence in student government. They were well acquainted
with the problems to be faced and have come up with
a realistic and workable solution. The student body
owes them a vote of thanks for many hours of thought
and work.
An Answer
For Non - Residents
One of the most frequently raised questions con-
cerning the proposed new student government has
been that of non-resident representation. Much of the
objection has been based on the assumption that the
off-campus student will be excluded from participation
in student government. A closer look at the situation
reveals the fallacy of this assumption.
The truly interested non-resident will be elected.
Of the 21 members of the Student Senate only five
must be residents: the college presidents; An off-cam-
pus candidate can be elected to either of the other two
vacancies?
One effect of the proposed government would be
to more effectively identify the interested non-resident
with his college. This problem certainly exists, and is
presently one of the real challenges facing the college
governments. If the problem of the non-resident is to
be solved, it must be done by the colleges. Placing an
individual on the Senate to represent the non-residents
would defeat the objective of including the off-campus
members in the college activities.
In looking to the future as well as examining the
present, the Student Government committee has pre-
sented the plan which it feels will most effectively
serve the Rice student community as a whole and the
Rice student as an individual. The proposed, govern-
ment would be unified, efficient, and effective in-rep-
resenting non-residents as well as residents.
7T
Lhe
THRE
THRESHING IT-OUT
Wants Bats in
Chem Belfry
TO THE EDITOR:
AT LAST the amazing truth
about the Rice Institute has been
revealed. Its function as a uni-
versity is merely secondary; the
primary service which it per-
forms is that of a wildlife re-
fuge. Sadly to relate, however, a
number of the honored guests
are seriously inconveniencing stu-
dents.
THE FORMER can be seen
blackening the skies at dusk, set-
tling in whining swarms upon
any unfortunate not wearing pro-
tective netting. It is realized that
mosquitoes must live too, and
enduring their depredations is
good for the character, and fur-
thermore, the healthful benefits
of a daily bleeding are not to be
denied.
HOWEVER, PROGRESS
marches on, and the sad realiza-
tion has come. The mosquito, long
a mainstay of civilization at
Rice, has become obsolete. The
mosquitoes will be retired with
full honors, and sand fleas are
to be substituted to carry on
their noble work.
IT IS THE humble purpose of
this communication to suggest a
manner in which the noble mos-
*quito at Rice' can be persuaded
to cease the performance of his
duties. Obviously, the stagnant
pools around the campus cannot
be covered with oil, as it would
destroy their simple beauty, and
kill the grass besides.
SIMILARLY, poison gas can-
not be sprayed about the campus,
for such an action would result
in the annihilation of many song-
birds, squirrels, and freshman
P.E. classes.
INSTEAD, THE Institute
should purchase a colony of bats
and permit them to roost in the
chemistry tower. In addition to
wiping out the mosquitoes, the
bats would add to the unique
charm of the Rice campus, and
would be a most appropriate
addition to the chemistry depart-
ment. The deposits of guano in
the tower could be harvested
yearly, thus permitting the bat
colony to be maintained on a
self-supporting basis.
—Respectfully,
BILL HUBBARD
and
STEVE KIERGAN
PEANUTS
(Pwurata it a molar tetan of tka
Pimm)
HAYDN'S SURPRISE"
SVMPMONV..
POLITICS
Experts Look At
Berlin Problem
GINGER PURINGTON
Editor
CLAIRE PLIJNGUIAN
Assistant Editor
ED SUMMERS
Manarin* Editor
ROBERT HINTON
Easiness Manager
JOEL HOCHMAN
Assistant Baa. M*r.
FRANK DENT
News Editor
Wants Parking •
Money for Charity
TO THE^EdlTOR:
- There has been much discus-
sion of the distribution of park-
ing tickets. If the receipts were
donated to the Rice ..Charity
Drive a worthy purpose would be
served in addition to taking a
little of the bitterness out of
paying the fines.
—Sincerely,
JOHN WILLINK
By PHIL BARBER and
BILL McGRATH
The Berlin crisis and our
attending confused foreign policy,
all the more confused because in-
flexible, represent deeper issues
standing behind the immediate
events. What will be our position
as we go into the proposed sum-
mit conference? First, we will
have openly acknowledged that
1 ? ^ . W A * rji* *a ¥ „ ' « I
at Berlin we can' be "and have
been pushed to the verge of all-
out nuclear war (!) But we will
have also shown that our willing-
ness to fight is based on a more
relevant moral issue than was the
case without support of certain
island bandits.
No Small War
The unfortunate situation in
which we cannot fight a small
war in Germany is due Jo an
extraordinary complex of causes:
the political experiences of World
War II, Acheson's containment
policy, Eisenhower and Dulles'
threats of massive retaliation, the
constantly threatening prepond-
erance of Soviet land forces, and
the growing menace of Soviet
missle-rattling as Khrushchev
gains the strength to force us, to
higher stakes.
Of course, it is at spots like
Berlin where the Western and
Soviet fdftes are in strained con-
tact where we can be pushed, but
the Berlin situation is only a
manifestation of the Urge
European problems of unification,
neutralization, and co-existence.
What To Discuss?
Bearing this in mind, what
should be talked about at the
conference if, mercifully, it
should take place? The position
of neither side is really quite so
' clear-cut as we have fyeen led to
believe. The Germans appear to
want reunification, and a final
' peace treaty; the French-perhaps
would like to see Germany di-
vided, weak and at least economi-
cally united to Western Europe.
Basically, the US seems to be
entrenched in the somewhat un-
realistic policy of wanting Ger-
many united, armed, and firmly
fixed in the Western camp. The
Russian policy is to keep the
Western nations divided by using
East Germany and Berlin as a
wedge to exploit the already con-
siderable differences and con-
fusions of foreign policy.
Only Realistic Answers
The only realistic solution
seems to be somewhat like the
plan of Kaparki, the Polish Com-
munist foreign minister: to pull
back both Western and Soviet
land and missile forces from Ger-
many, Czechoslovakia, and Po-
land and thus to create a broad
neutral buffer zone streaking
£** ■ jHfc My « W n
fromr Sweden and' Finland in the
Baltic through central Europe,
Austria, Switzerland, and Yugo-
slavia to the Adriatic. The pos-
sibility of getting ourselves into
embarrassing situations like the
Berlin crisis where we are threat-
ened with nuclear warfare would
be considerably reduced.
It should be pointed out, how-
ever, that the real source of the
confusion in Western policy lies
in the basic contradiction between
the mutually incompatible but
nonetheless openly avowed aims
of European unification as well
as German reunification.
_ One Germany?
Do we really want one Ger-
many, or would we be willing to
settle for two at the bargaining
table ? One Germany in one
Europe Is~ impossible. The Rus-
sians, because of their memories
of World War II, simply would
not allow this. Undoubtedly the
French would have their objec-
tions.
On the other hand, a united
and neutralized Germany outside
either camp would probably fall
into the old German role of play-
ing off East against West, al-
though it would provide an ad-
mirable buffer to prevent such
explosive situations as we
have.
But if the West really wants
Westfern Germany economically *
and militarily united into our
camps, then it must reconcile it-
self to losing Berlin.
Editors Divided
On this point the Thresher
political editors are divided. Mc-
Grath, covering his ears to the
yell of "Francophile!" from the .
other half, prefers a divided Ger-
many with Bonn integrated into
the West. Barber, smiling at
charges of being a Prussian
militarist, prefers a united but
militarily restricted Germaq£f>ut- ^
side of either camp.
Upcoming Pages
Here’s what’s next.
Search Inside
This issue can be searched. Note: Results may vary based on the legibility of text within the document.
Tools / Downloads
Get a copy of this page or view the extracted text.
Citing and Sharing
Basic information for referencing this web page. We also provide extended guidance on usage rights, references, copying or embedding.
Reference the current page of this Newspaper.
The Rice Thresher (Houston, Tex.), Vol. 46, No. 23, Ed. 1 Friday, March 20, 1959, newspaper, March 20, 1959; Houston, Texas. (https://texashistory.unt.edu/ark:/67531/metapth231113/m1/4/: accessed April 27, 2024), University of North Texas Libraries, The Portal to Texas History, https://texashistory.unt.edu; crediting Rice University Woodson Research Center.