University of Missouri - Savitar Yearbook (Columbia, MO)

Page 30 text:

ii , 1 ,N 2 xxl K 2 2 111 E Hs, -:ir ,Q Y Ea! lil Z W M i .N i , S X 5 M iii ' ! I 1 ii ' ff ii T' w 1 ,ii I C12 -.1 gil ! 26

Page 29 text:

Heeter continued First of all, to use these channels properly, a great deal of time, energy and dedica- tion is required. I have seen the administrator turn to his file cabinet, pull a file dated four years previously, and say: Yes, Mr. Student, I and my staff agree with you regarding this problem. We did considerable research on the problem four years ago and for the following reasons we concluded that it was impractical for us to solve the problem as you have outlined. The moral of the story is that students have to do their home work. They have to be willing to spend almost as much time as the professional administrator with whom they are dealing Cup to 50-60 hours a weekj to accomplish change through those channels. Most students are not willing to spend that much time. Second qualification-the Board of Curators, This year has seen an intrusion into the affairs of the campus by the Board of Curators. They have taken it upon themselves to make the kinds of operational-administrative types of decisions that properly belong on the campus level. We found that in the case of the Curators- because of their remoteness to the actual campus conditions andsituations,because of their relatively small amount of time spend pursuing University business, because of these, the Cura- tors lacked the expertise and understanding to deal with these problems adequately. Have 'tthe channelsn worked on some occasions? V A year ago Thomas said he had established channels with the administration which Leet had destroyed. We strengthened them this year. l think we were more frank and OPCH than previous administrations. l feel that the administration and faculty exhibited great restraint in the sit-ins in the Union. We worked through channels. On the selection of the Union director, we did a real selling job especially in philosophy. All three of the men interviewed by the student-faculty Union and Commons committee CBrock, Durett, Edwardsl were quite different fellows than A. C, Stotler. The Union is the living room of the campus instead of a Fifth Avenue display. The type of people who couldn't fit into this type of philosophy were immediately out. The fi- nancial aspects ofthe Union were subordinated completely. They wanted a man trained in student programming. What has come through lobbying in Jeff City. Two things, l feel personally I was able to accomplish a good deal last spring . . . with the legislature. The legislature had all these bills for passage-the most prominent dealing with obedience oaths by students. We talked to the main sponsors of the bills, the House majority and minority leaders and explained to them the situation as it existed on campus. I gave them my opinion of the effect of these bills . . . Consequently, the bills were tabled where they are at this time. What do you consider your failures as president? One of the things I was not able to do was spend more time with students. It's difficult to do. The busy work of this job is staggering. We tried to go back to the students but often the people on the dormitory end would mess up. It wasn't apathy on the part of the students but rather poor publicity. l had more difficulty working with a split administra- tion tofficers elected other than those people with whom he ranj rather than working with my own ticket. It makes it tough when your allegiance is elsewhere. There is no question in my mind that the way I handled intervisitation in the first several months was the right way. Had we been allowed to follow through it would have been passed in some form, l feel in February. It would have been analagous ous to the womenis key program. However, MSA decided to follow Vice President Goodman instead of me. lntervisitation is now dead according to the Chancellor for at least six months. After a year in office, looking back, how do you view the role of MSA president? How has your view changed? The president's role is equitable to that of MSA. He is the individual who must act as chief lobbyist and representative within the decision-making structure of the University. The job of MSA president is to find out where decisions are made, where the points of influence are situated and then proceed to use the understanding to pursue objectives of student welfare, student rights, etc. That is his sole job, that is all he is to do. You have to be the chief spokesman and representative of students, organize and administer all the activities of all those students working within MSA and other areas of the University. Basically, though, the role of the president is that of Hachieverf' Through his knowledge, understanding, and tactics he must attempt to accomplish those objectives which are his own and those objectives which are presented to him by other students.

Page 31 text:

The students said yes. The faculty said yes. The administration chain of command said yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes, yes. The chancellor said yes. Yes, even he said yes. Honest. And formulated a proposal. A modest proposal. Very modest: Members of the opposite sex may be guests in student rooms between noon and 5 p.m. any Saturday or Sunday, and between 8 and 11 p.m. on Fri- day and Saturdayf' And the Curators said no. On Dec. 12, 1969, after a hundred visions and revisions, they said more than no-they said no-no. So we learned that the nine persons who measure our academic and social freedom with coffee spoons had lifted and dropped our question in our empty cup, unwilling to disturb the cloistered universe. And we wondered, Do we dare?',-dare make decisions which a minute would reverse. ' On the weekend of Jan. 9-11, members of 23 fraternities dared. The universe was disturbed. Likewise the administration. So much that 20 fraternities were suspended and eventually placed on disciplinary pro- bation for the remainder of the Winter Semester. The most disturbed person of all, however, was Judge Billings, Board of Curators Grundy-in-Residence, who saw an irrefutable connection between intervisitation and illicit sex andlor illegal drugs. We should be so lucky. Spurred on by Greek courage and undaunted in the face of Greek tragedy, Independents dared ascend the dorm stairs. Not so many as expected, but still a sizable number of sex fiends high on who-knows- what stormed the cloister walls on February 16. Intervisitation crept rampant through University housing that Friday night, as did ever-vigilant house mothers and PA's with the in- sidious intent of taking names of miscreants to be handed over to the Dean of Students for prosecution. Since that time, the issue has been called dead, and Schwada has commented that he probably wou1dn't act on inter- visitation again for another four to six months. And so we wait, as we have waited before and as we will wait again. This year, next year, the years following. Indubitably. Indefinitely. The incidental issue- intervisitation-is it dead? Perhaps. The fundamental issue, however, the once and future issue of student self-determin- ation, of student rights, lives on. In spite of every determination, of student rights, lives on. In spite of everything.