New policy on alcohol considered
BY PETER FLETCHER
A new policy for alcohol on campus is Under consideration and may go into effect at the beginning ofthe fall semester, said Robert L. Mannes, dean of student life. However, there are no definite plans yet.
Mannes said the problem with the current alcohol policy is that it is extremely hard to enforce. “We must come up with a new policy, a new method of enforcement or both,” he said.
The current policy included in SCampus, the student handbook, allows the serving of alcoholic beverages on university property as long as the law is observed. Anyone who wants to serve al-
cohol at a function must submit a written request to Mannes. Someone 21 or over involved in a function where alcohol is served must sign a form that makes him responsible to see that no one under age is served alcohol.
Mannes said data show that more students are drinking and that more are drinking to excess. Concern among administrators over the growing abuse of alcohol on campus prompted the decision to revamp the current alcohol policy.
The present policy was approved by the Board of Trustees in 1970. Any change in policy would also have to be approved by the board.
Mannes, who is in charge of revising the
current policy, said, “The resDonse we are getting to the basic policy is that it is OK, but we need a better way of enforcing
it.
He said a new system is needed because he cannot issue permits to student groups predominantly composed of people under 21.
Fraternity rush parties present this type of problem because most of the students who rush are under21, Mannes said.
Mannes said he is concerned that an under-age student might leave a school function after drinking and have an accident. In a situation such as this, the university or student in charge would be responsible, he said.
Daily W Trojan
Volume LXVII, No. 115
University of Southern California
Los Angeles, California_
Friday, April 25, 1975
Mandatory program fee to be reinstated next fall
BY MARJIE LAMBERT and WAYNE WALLEY
The $4.50 mandatory programming fee will be reinstated in the fall.
The Executive Committee ofthe President’s Advisory Council voted Wednesday not to recommend any change in existing policy on programming.
That policy provides for a $4.50 mandatory fee, said Frances L. Feldman, professor of social work and chairman of the Executive Committee. She said the voluntary’ fee implemented this semester was only an experiment.
Several members of the committee said President John R. Hubbard had virtually assured them he would accept a recommendation which, in essence. calls for continuation ofthe mandatory fee.
Everyone present at the meeting—with the exception of David Blackmar. undergraduate representative to the committee and a junior in philosophy, and Alfred T. Polin. associate professor of management—voted for the mandatory fee.
Administrative support for the mandatory fee was said to be especially strong.
The mandatory fee was not collected this semester for the first time since 1968. when it was first instituted. Instead, the caucus implemented a voluntary fee system whereby students could pay the $4.50 fee at registration if they wanted to support the activities and programs traditionally paid for by the fee.
But only a small fraction ofthe students paid the fee, and instead of a $75,000 budget for one semester as past programming boards have had, the new Programming Council had only $6,000.
Some students complained that the staff handling registration actually discouraged students from paying the fee. Moreover, many students did not know what the programming fee does.
The council set up a booth on campus to give students a second opportunity to pay the fee, but only about 25 students did so.
The caucus was to have been informed late Thursday ofthe Executive Committee’s decision. A proposal for the continuation of the voluntary fee had been before the caucus.
Feldman said she doubted whether any recommendation by the caucus would change the Executive Committee’s proposal in light of the poor response the voluntary fee had gotten.
She said the caucus would have to provide evidence that continuation ofthe voluntary fee would be more beneficial than the mandatory fee.
“All evidence is against it,” she said, adding that evidence is not as important as the amount of money collected.
The caucus had decided to take action on the fee
after the poor response expressed in February. It approved a resolution calling for .75% of tuition to be set aside for programming beginning next fall, but was informed by Hubbard that the recommendation had been too late.
In a letter to the caucus, Hubbard said tuition would have to be increased by that .75% figure if the funds were to be set aside for programming, and that a tuition increase for next year and its allocations had already been decided on.
Hubbard also expressed dissatisfaction with the voluntary system and suggested in the letter that the caucus find an alternative method for programming.
The matter was referred to the Executive Committee by the University and Community Life Committee, which had been exploring various means of programming, including alumni support or an endowed student-body fund.
The Executive Committee was asked for suggestions, but it came back with only one recommendation. Its adoption was virtually assured before the answer went back to the University and Community Life Committee.
“Because of a probable lack of cultural and social activities, we asked ourselves questions so complex that we felt we needed guidance,” said Alvin S. Rudisili, chairman ofthe University and Community Life Committee.
Although the committee recognized the right of students to have a major voice in matters affecting their life on campus, it contended “that the university itself needs to assume responsibility for helping to underwrite campus programming which enriches the intellectual and cultural life ofthe campus.
“On the basis ofthe information presently available to us, we believe that a crisis of significant proportions faces USC because of what appears will be a drastic shortage of funds to underwrite programs and projects previously funded by the student programming fee,” the committee’s resolution said.
The Student Caucus has been asked to suggest criteria and procedures for the management ofthe fund, Feldman said.
“Now we must ask how we can make the system viable and have greater confidence in the management of the fee. We have to ask what we must improve,” Feldman said.
The caucus will probably appoint a programming board similar to those of the past to allocate the funds. Some members ofthe caucus have suggested that a check-off list be distributed at registration. Students could then indicate which programs they felt warranted their support.
(continued on poge W)
Council ballot deadline extended
The deadline for turning in ballots for the President’s Advisory Council election has been extended to May 5, said Marjie Lambert, chairman of the Student Elections Commission. The ballots were originally due today.
The campaign period, however, has not been extended.and all campaigning must end today. All campaign materials must be
removed from campus by Saturday.
Ballots were mailed to students this week. Students who do not receive ballots may vote in Student Union 201 May 2 and May 5 from 8:30 a.m. to 5 p.m. Students voting in this manner must sign affidavits declaring that they have not already voted.
Four students have withdrawn
or been disqualified from the election. They are John Nakaoka and Lance Vincent, who were running for commuter representative seats, and Cornelia Ann Hubbard andCele Hoffman, who were campaigning to be residence hall representatives. Votes cast for these students will not be counted, Lambert said.
The first meeting for newly elected PAC representives is May 7.
OVER THE NEST—Ken Kesey, author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and Sometimes a Great Notion, spoke to a large crowd on Dedeaux Field at noon Thursday. Kesey's informal speech dealt with his puzzlement about today's world. DT photo by Shuji Ito.
Author speaks about politics, propaganda
BY AURELIO ROJAS
Associate Sports Editor
There he stood, dressed in a faded denim suit, wearing boots that were so scuffed they seemed to accommodate half the dirt of his native Oregon.
Ken Kesey, author of One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest and Sometimes a Great Notion, and subject and star of Tom Wolfe’s The Electric Kool-Aid Acid Test, fumbled with the microphone behind home plate on Dedeaux Field at a noon speech Thursday.
With a canteen at his side and a pair of red-frame sunglasses tucked loosely in his jacket pocket, he looked like a cross between Daniel Boone and Red Buttons, although a coed seated in one of the first rows was moved to say, “He looks like Paul Newman.”
The emcee assumed Kesey’s position at the microphone as the guest lecturer sat back down behind home plate, signing a rubber coated baseball while he allowed time for the crowd to flow in.
“We have a special favor to ask of you, Mr. Kesey,” the emcee said. “We’d like you to donate all your memorabilia—some of your old manuscripts, loose typewriter ribbons, old wrestling awards—to our prankster archives, to be housed in our new
Nixon Library. Only a major metropolitan university, Mr. Kesey, like USC, will be equipped to handle those artifacts that have marked the last seven years of your turbulent career.”
“I hate to disappoint you,” Kesey replied as he stepped back to the microphone, “but I’ve already promised them to the Smithsonian Institute, to be placed next to the Spirit of St. Louis.”
The jam-packed stadium burst into laughter and applauded in agreement.
“I’ve been traveling on this speaking circuit for the better part ofthe last 10 years,” Kesey said as he started into the gist of his informal speech. “But after today I’m going to do just one more, and that’ll be it.
“A few years ago I found myself aboard a high-speed train going toward a curve I didn’t think the train could make. Half of those aboard stayed. I got off.” Kesey spoke about a conference he attended a few years ago in Montana which attracted approximately 7,000 representatives from the neighboring states. The purpose of the conference was to motivate people into becoming a more integral part of their government. Unfortunately, he said, the attempt failed.
(continued on page 9)