University of South Carolina Libraries
Contin SCPIRG weak too outmanned DEAR MS. MILLER: It appears that our self proclaimed emperor, W.H. Roberts, has donned the robes of environmental protection (tailored by SCPIRG), and he insists that those students who cannot see the garment fail to do so through sheer stupidity. Allow me, then, to examine this fabric of SCPIRG environmentalism to see how it will wear and how it will compare to the wardrobes of other em perors. Recall, if you will, the German chemical company that attempted to located a plant in Beaufort; the giant B.A.S.F. would have been an ideal subject for the SCPIRG environmentalists. Recall, too, that several state agencies, not a few state legislators, and almost all the rich souls on Hilton Head Island fought B.A.S.F. to a stand still-not a resounding victory, but a standstill, a battle of attrition that the Germans eventually aban doned. Unseasoned but aggressive, SCPIRG is promising similar results (or better) not only against new industries in the state, but against the large, firmly en trenched old-timers as well. SC PIRG, with an estimated $25,000 to '$50,000 and its "staff of professionals", will challenge hundreds of thousands, perhaps millions, of dollars spent for in dustrial researchers, Lechnicians and lawyers. Non-political, tax exempt SCPIRG, dependent upon state supported USC, will challenge the industries that bring such .huge tax revenues and finance the political campaigns in our state (including the campaigns of the legislators who fought B.A.S.F.). And, most important of all, student-directed corporate executives. Who will pay SC PRIG's lawyers and technicians and how much will such crusading miracle workers demand as their just salary? 040 LiD ndivdual income Ta 5in ttcme oiI thn .ag. 2 Matted lindontntere. - 6 Tol di.e 2 c 4an S I t 1 itnotam(itat 0ne 20tt fromtt bntnntn9 22 Odth te (from I.no ttI 607) Ot .t* * 2316 t,not ( ,ad td Ot,nts 21 .nd 22, - 24Il t istal riat ome les ., oentt Ae . fchF, ,td or 110. *to bac . ... -- - -t -- .1 9.iO .,Ot ... .. tntamtes O..t. '. eign me *NF otl.SDAt Ytnt **. .4 21y IMTno F,tttttOR 20tt AOA9Ht I ~ 2OtttDo o wNIan . 760. R uing Despite its high ideals and good intentions, SCPIRG is out numbered and outgunned to a hopeless extent. They are not Nader's Raiders and cannot succeed where the Raiders have; the Raiders are ALL PROFESSIONALS, coming from ALL PARTS OF THE U.S. and ALL of them are VOLUNTEERS, receiving only token fees for their efforts. SCPRIG is too small and too weak to hope for any success, and its very structure will prevent it from ever becoming stronger. The emperor's clothes are mere gossamer threads or less; people who do not see the garment are not foolish. But take heart, Mr. Roberts. You are not the first emperor to parade about in such imaginary splendor. And when you answer my letter (and I am certain you will) you will not be the first to push nouns against verbs to indignantly reclaim your lost, but non-existent, cause. Thus, I await y7our reply eagerly. Prove to me and to the University that SCPIRG-environmentalists can defeat the political-industrial machine, and I will gladly praise your finery. WILLIAM J. ARVAY No fraud in SCPIRG DEAR MS. MILLER: Robert Nixon's intemperate letter on SCPIRG was a good example of half-truth and name calling. Criticizing a group's activities is one thing, but charging some group with a differing philosophy with fraud is childish and extreme. SCPRIG's finance procedure is based on a simple concept: that if a majority of students petition for something decent and educational and constructive, and the rights of thoue who disagree are preserved, . . 4ES T KE/T hv7y xRLOCr ' TH )CPIR then the wishes of the majority ought to govern. This is basic democracy at work in the university system. What fraud is there in that? Unlike all the other student groups who receive fun ding through decisions by com mittee, SCPIRG has gone to the students to ask their permission. What fraud is there in that? Instead of bypassing the democratic procedures, SCPRIG has "gone to the people" - in an exhausting petition campaign to be certain that the students can speak on THIS appropriation - as they cannot on all of the others. If Whether to establish SCPIRG has become one of the most important issues on campus. The GAMECOCK has received more mail concerning this issue than any other. So, in order to present our readers' general feelings on the subject, we are devoting today's editorial page to the "continuing SCPIRG debate." asking a majority of students for their permission to establish and fund a student group is fraud, SCPIRG is guilty. Nixon refers to letters from one Roberts threatening revolution. This person is not a part of the SCPIRG organization, and his opinions are quite his own (as is his writing style). SCPIRG's whole theory is that working within the system is the only worthwhile course to pursue - but working within the system can be made more effective with a professional staff and funding and a serious effort by students to work in specific areas - chosen by them - in the public interest. SCPIRG is, at the moment, negotiating with statistics per sonnel to verify the signatures in an objective fashion. It is very simple to write a letter G deba to the editor critizing something. It is a little more difficult to spend weeks and months trying to establish a constructive outlet for student participation in protecting the enviroment and protecting the consumer. 8,000 students at USC say "No" to you, Mr. Nixon - so far. EPHRAIM ULMER Need to work for solutions DEAR MS. MILLER: The absurdness of Mr. Nixon's statements in his letter to the editor in THE GAMECOCK, Feb. 16, 1972 almost prompted me to remain silent. However, since some people on campus might not know that Mr. Nixon's allegations are completely false, I would like to clear up a few misapprehensions that were presented by an ab viously uninformed individual. Mandatory refunds have been emphasized and included in the SCPIRG petition that has been signed by over 8,000 students (not 10,000). If Mr. Nixon had come to one of the SCPIRG meetings that have been announced and open to all students, then he may have heard about one school in Oregon who had 20 per cent of the student body get refunds from the local board of SPIRG. This experience runs counter to Mr. Nixon's assertion that "refund-takers" are expected to be few. Mr. Nixon might have also discovered some of the checks on the SCPIRG organization at USC. For example, he could have learned that if SCPIRG's Local Board becomes a reality on the Carolina campus, it will, according to a legal contract, have to have a simplied refund procedure; it will be required to have its books open for inspection; it will also be required to have an annual audit by a CPA appointed by the Circuit Court Judge of Richland County; it will have to be dissolved on this campus if a majority of students get their refund; and finally, the names on the SCPIRG petition will te be verified using generally ac cepted statistical methods. The other assertions in Mr. Nixon's letter do not deserve a detailed reply. It is sufficient to note that apparently, without an understanding of any of the basic concepts behind SCPIRG, Mr. Nixon decided that it was easier to critize than to work on solutions to problems that affect students. BOB WARREN 'No right to tax us' DEAR MS. MILLER: For some time now your column has contained a great deal of discussion concerning the YAF vs. SCPIRG debate and I followed this issue closely. I must, therefore, say the following: I have lived in S.C. for 14 years and I am a product of her schools from the first grade to my present studies at the University. In those years I have seen this state grow up just a little bit. In grammar school, I attended overcrowded classrooms of 50 or more students and I can remember a time when the "average" South Carolinian had an education of just over fifth-grade level. The high school that I attended was originally built for 350. The year of my graduation, 1970, she had over 900 students on her rolls, yet the only additions that had been made to the original building were the acquisition of 3 trailers and a .icience lab. The school wasn't even accredited until my graduation and that was on the condition that the science lab, was completed before June 1970. 1 realize that this is boring and seemingly irrelevant, but it does pertain to the afore mentioned debate. In Mr. Robert's letter of last Friday, he stated that S.C. was (Continued on page 3) 1. .. EWN 7N/E ED .0&/S75 Jl-7HF /WA DM//