| OCR Text |
Show Building blocs GOP students caucus platform and to bloc vote for certain candidates. At the convention, student amendments to the platform seemed non-existent; however, student Republican leaders A Republican Student Caucus was formed before the Republican County Convention, but soon proved to be more of a Republican caucus than a student caucus. Fred Oswald, coordinator of Participation '72 from the Hinckley Institute of Politics, suggested that the caucus may be used to support certain issues on the county Republican pointed out that members of their, caucus were on the platform committee, and thus the student view was "written into the platform, rather than added to it." Bloc voting also seemed nonexistent. non-existent. Republican county and state candidates talked to the caucus one Thursday night before the convention, but no actual bloc voting decisions were made at the meeting. As was expected, most the candidates agreed on most of the issues asked of them. Seven pre-prepared questions were asked of the candidates. All the candidates were in favor of a change in county government form, thus supporting sup-porting the amendment allowing each county to decide its own government. However, no one would actually commit himself to the UTEGO proposal or complete city-county consolidation. There also seemed to be a consensus on Planned Parenthood. Paren-thood. Everyone agreed on allowing adults the information given out by the organization. However, they all agreed that the law states children under 18 are under parents' care and thus should have parents' permission to acquire the information. Ideas on fluoridation ranged from, "I don't care if I have fluorine in my water, but I feel I must protect the minority that does not want chemicals such as fluorine in their water supply," to "I would support whatever decision is made by a referendum vote." Again, no one would say he was in favor of fluoridation. All favored stricter zoning, especially in canyon areas. |
