THE RECORD

MARCH 1, 1977

NO. 38

LYNDON B. JOHNSON SCHOOL OF PUBLIC AFFAIRS, THE UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN

EDITOR Hoyt H. Purvis

BOULDING TO CONCLUDE PEACE LECTURE SERIES

Professor Kenneth Boulding will deliver the two final lectures in his series on world peace on Friday and Saturday, March 4‑5.

At 2 p.m. Friday, Boulding will speak on The Justice of Peace in the East Campus Lecture Hall.

At 10 a.m. Saturday he will conclude the lecture series, speaking on Policy for Peace in room 2.102 of the Thompson Conference Center.

Boulding, who is the Distinguished Visiting Tom Slick Professor in World Peace, opened the four‑part series with lectures on The Meaning of Peace and The Sources of Peace on February 18‑19.

In the opening lecture, discussing the meaning of peace, Boulding said he sometimes thinks the "greatest enemy of peace is the perception that it's dull."

He said peace has so many meanings and is easily misunderstood.

He noted that "neither peace nor war is really just the absence of the other, although we often define them that way."

Boulding stated that formal declarations of war are no longer common, but that in many respects war has been almost a norm.

He stressed the importance of the "self-perceived identities" in affecting the behavior of nation states. "In the case of nation states, the self‑image as warring is almost universal."

He also discussed "taboos" that have to be overserved in order to maintain the peace. These are a way of limiting the agenda.

Boulding said, "The learning of peace is not natural. It has to be created." He also commented if you have made sacrifices, it is hard to admit they were in vain, as in the case of the United States in Vietnam. He said "Vietnam was largely an accidental war. The decisions could have gone the other way, but once made they developed a dynamic and we were trapped."

He dismissed the view that wars have primarily economic motivation.

Boulding cited a study by Bruce Russett which he said indicated that "doves" tend to come from northern/ industrial areas while "hawks" tend to be rural/southern. "War, to a tremendous extent, is the product of the dullness of agriculture," Boulding said.

In the second lecture Boulding discussed what he called the "phase system" of war and peace. He said there are roughly four such phases: stable war, unstable war, unstable peace, and stable peace.

He cited several examples of the various phases. The Middle East, he said, is an area where war has been the norm for 30 years. On the other hand there are "islands of stable peace" in the world. He pointed to the United States‑Canadian border as one example. He said the 1817 Rush‑Bagot treaty between the two nations was the "first successful partial disarmanent" and should be widely known. Instead, he said, it is almost totally ignored by historians.

"We have all the mythology of war and no mythology of peace," Boulding said.

He said the two major underlying conditions of war and peace are strain (or stress) and strength. He said strength, in this sense, is the capacity to resist strain/ stress.

"If strength is high and strain is low, as in the case of the U.S. and Canada, you'll have stable peace." If strain is high and strength low, you may have stable war," he said.

Factors contributing to strain can include an extreme consciousness of the past (such as in Ireland), dynamics of threat systems, the structure of power roles and the means of filling them, and the professionalization of conflict and the war industry.

Boulding also cited the theory that "all the skills that equip people to rise to power unfit them to exercise that power. "

"It's one thing to be a critic; its another to be in a position to govern. Different skills are required. The classic example of this is a revolutionary leader, who may be effective as a revolutionary but is not suited to govern. The incredible exception to this was the American revolution, where the revolutionary leaders were well suited to govern."

Determinants of strength, Boulding said, include communications patterns, cultural integration, technology, and economic development.

A key to creating conditions for stable peace, he said, would be "taking boundaries off agendas" as in the Rush‑Bagot agreement.

HUMAN SERVICES CONFERENCE SET

A conference on Human Services in Texas Communities: Prospects and Problems will be held at the Thompson Conference Center, March 21‑22 under the sponsorship of the LBJ School, in cooperation with the Graduate School of Social Work and the School of Architecture and Planning.

The conference/workshop will bring together human services planners and deliverers from regional and local governments, consumer groups, and related public and private agencies. Participants will consider the technical aspects of social services planning, methods and fiscal resources for joint planning and delivery, the possibilities for mixing and matching federal resources at the local and regional level and the potential for Title XX in Texas.

Among those scheduled to address the conference are T. M. (Jim) Parham, former commissioner of the Georgia Department of Human Resources ("Human Services in Georgia"); Hortense Dixon, executive assistant to the Mayor of Houston (Human Services in Texas—The Metropolitan Perspective); and Merle E. Springer, deputy commissioner for financial and social services, Texas Department of Public Welfare ("Title XX in Texas").

Dean Alan K. Campbell of the LBJ School is scheduled to welcome the participants at the opening session on March 21.

Professors Victor Bach, Beryl A. Radin, and Lodis Rhodes are scheduled to be on the program, as is James E. Hartling, a member of the participating faculty at the LBJ School.

Bach will make a presentation of "Housing and Community Development/General Revenue Sharing" and lead a workshop on "Public Participation: Managing and Using It."

Radin will be a discussant for a panel discussion on "Funding Resources for Human Services—The New Scene" and will lead a workshop on "Intergovernmental Relations."

Rhodes will direct a workshop on "Data Resources and Methods for Human Services Planners."

Hartling will make a presentation on the Concentrated Employment and Training Act (CETA) and along with the Peter Jennings of the Graduate School of Social Work will conduct a workshop on "Program Evaluation."

Robert J. Macdonald, associate director of the Office of Conferences and Training, will serve as moderator for the panel discussion on funding resources.

Others taking part in the program will include David M. Austin, director of the Center for Social Work Research, Graduate School of Social Work; Robert 0. Humble, director, Division of Health Planning, Texas Department of Health Resources; and Herman Steingraph, senior research associate, Center for Social Work Research.

The conference is being organized by the Office of Conferences and Training.

"On the Record"

. Antonio Gonzales deLeon, head of the economics section of the Mexican Foreign Ministry, will speak on "Mexican‑U.S. Relations" at a schoolwide seminar on Wednesday March 9 at 4 p.m.

. Daniel P. Rabovsky has been named as the Johnson Congressional Intern for 1977‑78. He is a graduate of Dartmouth College with a degree in physics and had several years of work experience before entering the LBJ School. The year‑long internship begins with service with a Congressional committee during the summer and will continue throughout the year, including a research project for the committee.

. Ruth Roth, research associate for the Meals for the Elderly project, gave birth to a baby boy, Daniel, on February 17.

. A recent article in the Washington Post included a number of quotes from Joe Motter, a 1976 LBJ School graduate now with the Northern Virginia Planning District Commission. Motter helped prepare a Commission report on drug abuse in the area. The report, which was the subject of the Post article, indicated a serious drug abuse problem among older people.

. March 2 is the final day for the exhibit on display in the LBJ Library, America from Amerigo Vespucci to the Louisiana Purchase. It is a collection of 150 rare and precious items—letters, books, maps, and artifacts—which trace and document the story of this nation from the time of its discovery in the late 15th Century through its earlier development and creation, to its first major expansion at the turn of the 19th century.

. The next issue of The Record will be dated March 22, following the spring vacation (March 14‑18).

WEDDINGTON REVIEWS LEGISLATIVE TOPICS

Current legislative issues were discussed by State Representative Sarah Weddington of Austin at a brown‑bag luncheon on February 15.

She said the mood of the 65th Legislature differs from the two previous sessions she has been in office. "People are more anxious to be on the 'team.' This affects their ability to get good committee assignments and to get legislation through."

Weddington said her experience in the Legislature has taught her "the importance of using strategy." She said, "It isn't enough to have good bills and good people. You also have to have a strategy and know the procedure."

She expressed concern about the emergency highway legislation which was approved by the House. "I was distressed by the press coverage. The press didn't explain the impact of the bill even though they told the cost. The highway bill would set aside over one‑third of the real funds surplus. And this doesn't include public transportation, just highways ... It would take one‑half of what the state would have in new appropriations for this year."

Weddington said she was surprised that more opposition had not developed to the highway funding, but noted that many influential groups favor the legislation.

Turning to financing for education and the LBJ School, she pointed out that many legislators are "resentful of UT" and want to share money from the Permanent Fund. She opposes such moves but predicted "a big fight."

Weddington said she considered the LBJ School "very important to me."

She said the School "has produced important research for the state" and noted that LBJ School interns, including Ellen Jones and Cassie Goyne who are currently working with her, "have done an excellent job."

Weddington said, "We need to strengthen the Coordinating Board. It makes no sense for every university to be trying to do everything."

Among specific legislative proposals discussed by Weddington were:

County ordinance power—By local option vote of the citizens, county commissioners could be given specific or general ordinance powers. This would effect ability to regulate such problems as health, massage parlors, fireworks, rabid dogs, etc.

Commission on the Status of Women—Weddington expressed optimism about getting approval of the commission, which passed the Senate in the last session but was not approved by the House.

Presidential primary—As a member of the Elections Commission, Weddington is working on a direct‑vote primary with proportional representation.

Malpractice insurance—One of the major issues of this session. "We're getting into a lawyer vs. doctor situation. We have a long way to go in working it out."

Alternate energy sources—Weddington has introduced a resolution requesting state institutions to make use of alternative energy sources in the construction of new state buildings. Professor Marlan Blissett has testified in favor of the proposal.

TITLE XX ARTICLE

The second of two articles on "Title XX and Public Participation," by Leilani Rose, Frances Zorn, and Beryl Radin has been published in Public Welfare.

The article in the winter, 1977, issue of the journal of the American Public Welfare Association assesses the actual programs developed to assure public participation in 23 states and the District of Columbia on the basis of responses to a questionnaire and follow‑up examination of state plans. The study was conducted at the LBJ School during 1976 by Zorn and Rose, as part of their independent project under the supervision of Professor Radin.

The article includes recommendations for increasing public involvement in Title XX planning.

BLISSETT ON PANEL ON ENERGY ATTITUDES

How do consumers view the energy problem in the United States? How much are they willing to do to alleviate the situation?

Although many Americans believe we are in the midst of an energy crisis, few are moved to complain, according to a University of Texas study of energy consumers in the Southwest.

The study was conducted by Dr. Sally Cook Lopreato, director of social systems analysis in the University's Center for Energy Studies, and Dr. William Cunningham, associate dean of the UT‑Austin Graduate School of Business and associate professor of marketing administration.

Along with Dr. Marlan Blissett of the LBJ School, they discussed consumer attitudes about energy on "The Next 200 Years," a weekly radio program of the University.

Consumers tend to blame Congress and the energy companies for the present situation, the survey shows.

"Ninety‑two percent of our respondents said that Congress has not done all it can to solve the energy problem," Dr. Lopreato reports.

"And approximately half of the sample indicated that they felt the energy companies were responsible in some way for the crisis," Dr. Cunningham adds.

However, he notes, a large portion of respondents (58 percent) also indicate that consumers, by failing to conserve, are actually responsible for the current crisis.

He also found from the survey that consumers were willing to make substantial effort to conserve energy so long as conservation did not interfere with their lifestyle or cost too much. Where conservation began to have an impact on quality of life, some effort was indicated, but where expense was involved, consumers were willing to make very little effort to conserve.

Americans agree that natural resources are becoming scarce, but "they are very dependent on technology to provide solutions" to mitigate the energy crisis, Dr. Lopreato observes.

"Because most people are so dependent on technological systems that transcend (the individual's) capacity to do anything about them, consumers tend to look to government or to business for solutions, so I really don't find that these attitudes are at all surprising," says Blissett, who has worked on a number of energy‑related projects at the LBJ School.

" We find that everybody seems to believe in an energy crisis," Lopreato says "and a large majority of people report conserving energy. I can only translate this into an assumption that the American people are ready for a comprehensive, strong national energy program."

Would the most effective solutions to the energy problem come from individual consumer action or from government regulation or deregulation?

Cunningham believes, from the evidence provided by the survey, that consumers would respond favorably to deregulated fuel prices and would make substantial efforts to reduce consumption of electricity and natural gas.

Blissett agrees there are many areas in which the market ought to be allowed to function.

So long as government regulations continue to depress the price of fuels, the incentive a free‑market price would provide to conservation will be delayed, he adds.

However, Blissett does believe that most individual solutions are really almost beyond the pale of most family budgets today."

"Many individual courses of action are capital expenditures for the individual homeowner and can't be viewed as an energy conservation measure by themselves, but must be factored into the whole economy of the household," Blissett says.

LEGISLATIVE ISSUES VOLUME PUBLISHED

Texas Legislative Issues, the report of the 65th Texas Legislature Pre‑Session Conference, has been published by the LBJ School.

The volume contains major presentations to the conference held last November. It also includes summaries of conference discussions of major policy questions confronting the 65th Legislature. In particular the focus is on fiscal and economic questions; the work of the Joint Advisory Commission on Government Operations; and on four topical areas: professional malpractice risks; energy development and regulation; property taxation; and crime and criminal justice.

Included in the book are sections by House Speaker Bill Clayton, Lt. Gov. Bill Hobby; Comptroller Bob Bullock; F. Ray Marshall, who is now Secretary of Labor; and Alan K. Campbell, now dean of the LBJ School.

Copies of the publication, which was edited by Hoyt Purvis, are available through the Office of Publications.

INTERNATIONAL BANKER TO SPEAK MARCH 2

James R. Greene, who recently became executive vice president and a member of the board of directors of the American Express International Banking Corporation, will speak on "Debt Problems of Developing Countries as Seen by an International Banker" at 2 p.m. Wednesday March 2 in the Student Lounge.

Greene will draw on his experience as in rescheduling debt payments of less-developed countries and his role as special presidential envoy to the Government of Peru for the settlement of expropriation claims in 1973‑74.

He was previously with the Manufacturers Hanover Trust Company, where he was senior vice president and deputy general manager of the international division.

Prior to embarking on his career in banking, Greene served in the foreign service. He is a member of the Council on Foreign Relations and has served on the advisory board of the Export‑Import Bank of the United States. He is a past president of the Bankers Association for Foreign Trade.

In 1971 he was honored by the Government of Colombia which conferred on him the Gran Orden de la Cruz de Boyaca.

RHODES REVIEWS ELDERLY POLICY

"There is no unitary Federal policy with respect to the elderly."

That assertion was made by Dr. Lodis Rhodes, assistant professor of public affairs at the LBJ School, when he presented the fourth in a series of lectures on "Gerontological Issues," being offered at UT during the spring semester. "Social Policy and the Aging" was the topic of his speech.

Rhodes is directing an LBJ School Policy Research Project on Alternate Care: Service Options for Long‑Term Care of the Elderly.

"To the extent that policies affecting the elderly can be identified, they exist as either universalistic pronouncements which bear scant relationship to programmatic realities or they exist as corollaries of cash transfer and/or social welfare issues," he said.

In support of that assertion, Dr. Rhodes reviewed the historical development of attitudes toward social welfare and social services in the United States, noting that in the early years the "survival of the fittest" philosophy pre-assistance to needy persons was in the form of charity and handled at the local level.

He pointed out that that philosophy continued into the early 20th Century when the country was undergoing drastic changes in terms of rapid urbanization, industrialization and population growth. Rhodes explained that those conditions produced more people who were unable to be self‑sufficient and more likely to run into problems and be vulnerable.

"Then after the Great Depression of the 1920s came the Social Security Act of 1935," Rhodes recalled. "That was the first major national legislation to deal with such problems. People began to think that maybe we as a governmental entity ought to consider assuming responsibility for meeting the needs of people in our society. It was a shift from a private to a public perspective."

Previously, any help was always on a temporary basis, according to Dr. Rhodes, with the idea that later the needy person would get back on his feet and be self-sufficient again.

"That's part of the individualistic ethic in this country," he continued, "and the concept is probably quite inappropriate for many elderly people in terms of the type of care they will need from now on. The Social Security Act was predicated on the idea of cash assistance on a temporary basis and it started out as a pay‑in insurance program. But with some of the new programs, specifically Title XX, many would argue that it's no longer an insurance program, that it's beginning to border on social service, social welfare."

Commenting on the legislation of the 1960s, Rhodes said recognition came that social services were a legitimate function within the framework of service delivery.

That period also saw the emergence of categorical programs, providing assistance to various segments of the population.

"The Older Americans Act of 1965 was part of the categorical legislation passed in the 1960s," he said. "One of its key objectives was to make available comprehensive programs which would include a full range of health, education and social services to older citizens. It was the intention of that law to establish the framework for an Administration on Aging."

Rhodes explained that Title XX, which is part of the Social Security Act, identifies the elderly as one client group, but that it is not specifically for the elderly.

"When I say that we don't have a unitary Federal policy with respect to the aging, I mean that what policies exist have objectives so broad that they really don't provide any direction as to what should be done," Rhodes said. "Consider that the Older Americans Act of 1965 has been amended almost every year since then, or at least every two years. And Title XX has really outstripped the Administration on Aging when it comes to providing services to the elderly."

The public lecture series on aging, which will continue through the spring semester, is held each Thursday at 6:30 p.m. in Burdine Hall 208.

SCHMANDT PAPER CONSIDERS RESEARCH

The sixth in the LBJ School's series of working papers, Financing and Control of Academic Research by Jurgen Schmandt, has recently been published.

In the paper Schmandt traces the growth of academic research and its place in a nation's science policy agenda and discusses some of the major issues in the areas.

Schmandt looks at academic research in a selected group of countries and makes some comparisons between Western European nations, Japan, the Soviet Union, and the United States.

Among the issues dealt with in the paper are criteria for scientific choice; competition for funds; stability of support; financial inflexibility of centralized educational systems; the requirements of 'big science'; interdisciplinary problem-oriented research; institutional versus project funding; and internal and external controls.

Copies of the publication and others in the Working Paper Series are available through the Office of Publications.

DATES TO REMEMBER

March 16—Alumni Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m., LBJ School

April 15—Proposals for Association by-laws amendments and other proposals requiring a vote of the Association membership must be into the Association Secretary.

May 18—Alumni Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m., LBJ School

June 1—Mailout of ballots for voting on Association motions and by‑laws amendments and solicitation of both self‑nominations and nominations from the floor for 1977‑1979 Alumni Board offices.

June 20—Deadline for receipt of June 1 ballots by the Association Secretary.

July 1—Mailout of ballots for voting on 1977‑1979 Alumni Board Officers.

July 20—Deadline for receipt of July 1 ballots by the Association Secretary.

July 20—Alumni Board Meeting, 5:30 p.m., LBJ School

August 1—1977‑1979 Alumni Board members take office.

THE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION BOARD

President: Mike Moeller

Vice President: Bruce Esterline

Secretary: Jean Shoemaker

Treasurer: Jan Younglove

Director of Committees: Mel Waxler

For addresses and telephone numbers of Board members, please consult your Alumni Directory. If you did not receive a copy, please write or call Mel Waxler, 910 Duncan Lane, No. 108, Austin, Texas 78705, (512) 476‑1509.

PRESIDENT'S MESSAGE

LBJ School Alumni Association

It would be an understatement to say that the past two years have been difficult ones for the Alumni Association. For obvious reasons, the Association was small and poorly funded. Hopefully, these hindrances will pass as the number of LBJ School graduates grows.

As with most new organizations, the Association's first elected officers came into their positions with enthusiasm and a desire to work and the belief that most LBJ alumni shared those attitudes. More than anyone else, Mel Waxler, Director of Committees, attempted to provide avenues by which all alumni could participate directly in the work of the Association. Quite frankly, we discovered that direct involvement in the Association's endeavors was not what most alumni wanted. One reason for this, of course, is the fact that most LBJ graduates have very little spare time to devote to any kind of extra projects and that's understandable.

On the bright side, we also found a handful of alumni scattered across the country who were willing and able to help get the organization on its feet. Ultimately, most of these people became chairpersons of the Association's permanent committees. In addition, response to our first fund drive was gratifying. The proceeds enabled us to provide an alumni directory which I have personally found invaluable.

It's no mere coincidence that the Alumni Association's search for direction has occurred during a similar state of flux at the LBJ School, itself. Fortunately, several administrators and faculty members at the School were willing to take time away from working on the School's problems to work with us on ours. I, personally, will be eternally grateful to Jurgen Schmandt for having the courage and understanding to include alumni in the process of searching for a new Dean even though the President of the University made it clear she did not want us included. In addition, Liz Hall and Wilda Campbell have been eager and willing to work with us even though we've undoubtedly stretched their tolerance levels considerably.

At long last, the School has a new Dean who, I believe, will provide the School with stability as well as additional prestige. The Alumni Association, too, has found its footing. In addition to the Directory, all alumni will soon be receiving some proposed by‑law changes that will permit the organization to function more efficiently and effectively in the essential areas of providing services to the School, graduating students, and alumni. In addition, we'll be electing new officers and trying to raise additional funds.

There is probably no more appropriate synopsis of the Association's first two years than the words of Austin's own poet laureate, Willie Nelson: "It's been rough and rocky traveling, but we're finally standing upright on the ground."

Not only that, but we've even begun to walk, too.

---Michael Moeller

ALUMNI BOARD MEETS WITH SECOND YEAR STUDENTS AND 1975 GRADS

On February 8, the Alumni Board met with a number of second‑year students and 1975 LBJ graduates to share ideas on how best to include recent and upcoming graduates in Alumni Association activities. Various Board members first explained the evolution of the Association and expressed their opinions on where the Association presently stands and where it is headed. Then a discussion followed encompassing many problem areas, including Association funding, communication, placement, and the bylaws. The meeting ended with plans to regather and formulate specific ideas for resolving some of the problems discussed. The interest and enthusiasm in the Alumni Association displayed by various persons in attendance assures the Association of a bright promising future.

THE ALUMNI ASSOCIATION WELCOMES NEW DEAN

The LBJ Alumni Association Board of Directors on behalf of all LBJ alumni wishes to take this opportunity to welcome Dean Campbell to the LBJ School. The Board has met with Dean Campbell and is extremely gratified by the experience, ability, and competence he brings to the School. The Association looks forward to a prosperous working relationship with the new dean, and formally offers him all the cooperation and assistance it can possibly provide.

A COMMENTARY FROM THE ALUMNI BOARD

An Alumni Network for Placement and Internships: Can It Work?

When the LBJ Alumni Association was created almost two years ago, the Board of Directors concluded that placement of graduates and identification of internships for students were to be given top priority. A plan for a national placement‑internship network was devised and has been discussed to determine its viability. The following is an attempt to describe the network and to highlight its advantages to graduating students, veteran alumni, and the School.

To structure the network, the country could be divided into regions, the size of each region to be determined by the number of graduates working within a given area. For example, suppose we delineate four regions. Presently, the West has approximately 10 graduates; the East, approximately 25; the Midwest, approximately 20; and the South, approximately 85. One alumnus in each region could be responsible for coordinating the regional placement and internship efforts. To illustrate the way in which the regional effort might work, let us focus on one region—the Midwest. The regional coordinator, in cooperation with the national association's placement and internship directors and the School's placement office, would identify ten agencies within the region and would designate an alumnus closest to each agency to be responsible for the following: (1) familiarizing the agency with the LBJ School and "selling" the School to the agency to facilitate agency requests for permanent and summer personnel; (2) keeping in contact with the agency to maintain the School's visibility; and (3) relaying placement and internship openings to the regional coordinator so that he or she can maintain records to be passed eventually to the School's placement office where the information can be centralized and a placement bulletin can be published.

If all the regions worked effectively in such a manner, imagine the benefits to be realized: (1) The School would be able to establish a broader recognition base and a national reputation from which both the School and alumni would gain; (2) Students graduating from the School would find themselves less overwhelmed by job prospects or the lack of them. Furthermore, graduates would begin to fill positions in areas and agencies that have not as yet been touched or saturated by veteran alumni; and (3) The veteran alumni would be able to tap the network for their own purposes should they desire to vacate their present positions and move elsewhere, or should they wish to hire permanent or summer personnel.

The above proposal is only a skeleton of the plan that would have to be developed, and any effort of this magnitude would require broad‑based alumni participation. The Alumni Board believes that an alumni placement network can succeed, and that the benefits to be obtained are worth the costs to be invested. What is your opinion? If you have any comments, suggestions, or alternative placement-internship proposals, please write or call a Board member.