4
Tuesday, March 21, 1978
University Daily Kansan
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Comment
Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the Kanan editorial staff. Staged columns represent the views of only the writers.
Funding change better
The problems and curiosities of the mysterious FTE are finally coming to an end.
FTE stands for full-time equivalency enrollment. It also stands for a complicated method of funding Kansas universities that links the amount of money each school gets to the number of students it enrolls. FTE is notorious for not taking actual costs of education into account and for treating the chemist who needs a lab and equipment the same way as it does a literature major who uses books and a classroom.
Fortunately, the Board of Regents has finally ditched FTE. Better yet, the Regents have developed a method of funding that will make Kansas a leader in innovative funding techniques. The method was passed last week. It is called formula funding.
Formula funding will go into effect in the budgets for fiscal year 1980. It will be used to compute the schools' budgets for submission this summer.
THE DIFFERENCE between the old and new systems is two-fold. First, Kansas schools will no longer have to depend totally on their enrollments for their appropriations. The formula approach will take into account all costs—including instruction, libraries, administration, student services and others—and use them to compute a school's budget, making allowances for costly courses.
Second, Kansas will look to other states to determine how much it should give its universities. Five universities—in
Oklahoma, Iowa, Colorado, Oregon and North Carolina—have been selected as models for Kansas to follow. An average of their costs will serve as the basic level of Kansas funding.
The plan is heartening in light of a study done by a Regents' task force, a study that showed the peer institutions were funded at a basic level higher than Kansas universities. Therefore, the establishment of formula funding in Kansas will begin with requests for "catch-up funds," extra money to raise Kansas institutions to the level of their peers.
THE FORMULA funding plan has attracted national attention. Higher education departments in eight states have expressed interest in the plan. The state of Washington's department says it will be guided in large part by the Kansas program.
The plan deserves widespread study because enrollments at many universities are going down. The University of Kansas has been an exception, but its enrollment records are set each year by narrower margins. Its FTE declined this spring. Under the old funding methods, the drop would mean a cutback in funds. Using a formula method, KU could be in line for an increase.
FTE is outdated. If enrollments decline significantly, there is always a chance that a school funded by FTE will lose money for more expensive classes or programs. The Regents' elimination of FTE was done with an imaginative plan and a timely, pioneering stroke.
New hope arises for Kansas boosters of tourism and politics. A bill thought to be dead in the State Legislature was revived last week by a parliamentary maneuver in the Kansas Senate. It would give the state a presidential primary election.
Primary helps economy, politics
Under the bill, a special election would be set up in April of presidential election years, adding the preference poll to municipal elections. After the voters chose their favorite candidates for chief executive, the political parties will vote at the choice and at their convention. Each candidate would get a proportion of national delegates equal to his proportion of the Kansas vote.
one bill has more interesting provisions. To get on the ballot, a candidate would need either to get the signatures of 1,000 voters of his party on a petition or to pay a fee that is less than what if someone is rich enough to afford the fee, he doesn't need voter support.
BUT PROBABLY the most interesting feature of the proposed Kansas primary is a space on the ballot for "none of the above." A vote in that space would be a vote to send an uncommitted delegation to the party's national convention.
The bill was introduced in the Kansas House in January 1977. Since then it has skipped in and out of the elections committee twice and the calendar and printing committee once. It has been up for debate on the House floor several times. It was passed by the House on the deadline passed for action on House-sponsored bills.
But last week the Senate Elections Committee changed its position on the senate floor. If the Senate gets around to it—which is
Ambiguity mars AURH efficiency
To the editor:
One might blame the press for the absence of stories about the Association of University Residence Halls but after close scrutiny, it becomes obvious that there is very little to prove that it worked that AUTH is responsible for not actually newsworthy; even if it were, there would not be much to print.
To my knowledge, two membership drives have been
This is a letter stemming from frustration and from tempered, yet internally stressed, anger. I have been chairman of the AURH Judicial Board, a board of a college activity (including active membership). Under AURH rules, the board must have nine active members representing at least six of the eight residence halls. The last time the board had that large a membership was at the end of the 1977 spring semester. The board is in need of membership, although I am not appealing for such.
KANSAN Letters
conducted by the association through its executive leaders. Of all the applications that were allegedly submitted, none ever came to me indicating interest in serving on the board; this same problem was experienced by the AUHR Board of Appeals for the institution's cellularization rate appeals). The board of appeals is one of the few vital functions within the association; it is a busy board, as any of its members will testify, and it takes a massive and cumbersome load off the system and women in dealing with appeals to the housing vacating-rate plan.
In my opinion, only one other vital committee exists within the association: the contracts committee. As the name implies, this committee proposes for modifying the existing residence hall contract. The changes, is it hoped,
represent the desires of the
residents and those of the
administration. That is not to say
that the final results are always
fair.
The residence halls are in a period of population increase; at the beginning of the fall semester, the halls were operating at more than one percent capacity than such occupancies for occupants, the obvious way for the system to make money more is to try to get all the occupants that it can. The methodology for such, as reflected in the new contract, is to increase the price of a single room occupancy disproportionately by a double room occupancy.
Specifically, the proposed increases are as follows: singles, from $1,600 to $1,710; doubles, from $1,275 to $1,300.
"Well then," one might ask, "if you are so disgusted with the situation, why don't you contact the AUHR and see what can be done?" The reply is simple: Such contacts have ben made.
but the results have often been minimal.
If the leadership improves, the organization may have a chance of getting something done for the residents besides spending their money. It should be noted that these leadership problems are not new; last year's administration would be targeted for the same reason of interpersonal conflicts.
One might think student apathy is the problem, or at least part of it. As an administration analyst, you don't actually know the problem. Rather, most organizations, committees and task forces are ambiguous with respect to the specifics of what you want to do, and will take to get it done. In this confused world we live in, all the student does not need is ambiguity; there is no desire for tenuous and plausible answers to future challenges, and who can blame the students?
Douglas Femec Merriam junior
somewhat dubious, because the bill is still little-known—it might pass this session.
John Mitchell
Editorial writer
It would be a shame if the bill didn’t pass. Looked at in certain ways, it is strange that the bill is not supported by more people. Some groups should pounce on the measure and lobby it through to completion to serve their best interests.
THE KANSAS TOURISM boosters are a prime example. The Kansas Department of Economic Development would have an easier time of promoting tourism in the state. Every four years, if the races were close enough, Kansas would win more tournaments and diatetes and their entourages. Packing more aides, assistants and security guards than moderately successful rock
groups, a front-runner would bring many people into Kansas immediately. Because the primary would be somewhat different in season, the third-string hospital would be around as well.
Storekeepers and businessmen would be especially glad to see the candidates, feel their businesses and spend their money.
Political campaigns, even those with federal spending lids, are habitually generous, but the economy would take an upward turn.
THE PRESS attention given to primary states is almost as impressive as the money spent in them. Kansas would meet要求 in this regard, but also the famous correspondents. And how easterners' mental picture of Kansas as semi-dry, flat wheat country was if Mount Oread were to show up on the CBS evening News!
Kansas would show up in
Newswire magazine's weekly dissections of campaign strategies. Depending on how well the candidate is scheduled, the Kansas election might even emerge as a watershed in the political season. Sayings would arise if the Kansas goes, so goes Colorado.
And there is a world of possibilities for Kansas fama in the "none of the above" option. It takes little imagination to conjure up images of reformers, eager to demonstrate voter boredom before voting. None of the Above president. Campaign announcements on television "-Vote," but vote for no one"-and huge posters, preferably blank, would mark the efforts of that valiant group. Such a conspiracy may help voters; if voters are that apathetic, None of the Above could end up winning the national nomination.
AND FINALLY, there is an unsurpassed opportunity for University of Kansas students.
If they liked having Gerald Ford here for two days, they ought to love seeing all the politicians who want a place alongside him in the act of staying for one to two weeks. Candidates for the presidency are even more interesting than candidates, be it candidates, to be noticed, are forced to say controversial things. Former residents are free to say them.
From a personal viewpoint, it would seem the School of Journalism would be happy indeed to see the presidential address of Budding reporters would have actual national figures to hone their skills on. Young cameramen would learn first hand the problems of filming a movie from a Secret Service agent. And of course, all job-hunting KU journalists would enjoy the opportunity of presenting these reporters from all those newspapers and all those broadcasting networks.
Prof criticizes 'antigay' innuendo
To the editor:
Pat Allen's otherwise intelligent editorial ("Columbian reveals 'he's woman," March 7, 1978) was marred by one unnecessary innocuode against gays, gay sympathizers and possibly her own editorial work. She dresses the issue of whether there is "gay sympathy" in Mitchell's writings, Allen says, "I can't speak for Mitchell, but he seems like a regular guy."
Why does Allen bother to tell us that Mitchell is a "regular girl" in the game, she says that the regular girl's hair sympathizers? Or that Mitchell
is a gay sympathetic despite being a "regular guy"? Or that even if he is to touch pro-gay, he couldn't possibly be "one of the best" or "regular guy"? Then again, why did Allen say that Mitchell only "seems like a regular guy"? Any way you read it, Allen's remark is sympathetic to, sympathetic to, and to Mitchell.
Even if one excuses the abysmally low political consciousness of Allen's remark,
one cannot overlook the personal inconsiderateness toward her colleague, Mitchell. Regardless of Mitchell's sexual persuasions to which nobody responds, Mitchell will beMitchell). Allen's little joke is ultimately at his expense. If Mitchell is gay or pro-gay, the comment is a direct affront. If Mitchell is nongay or antigay, the comment reinforces outwarded and insecure prejudices.
Alien's remark is particularly unusual coming from a woman and in an editorial about being a woman. It is more like the kind of defensive accusatory bantering that men usually
direct toward other men, especially their friends, and especially when they are afraid of sharing any honest communication about sex. It is an unhealthy way for any two people to talk about other whether they are two male friends or, as in this unusual case, male and female co-workers.
In the future, I hope you will prevent the childish inside jokes of your staff from adulterating the professional quality of your work.
Michael D. Storms
Assistant professor of psychology
Pot laws restrict liberties, enforce set morality
Laughing at another's opinion is a childish method of expression. It accomplished little for those who thought Voth was right, and it probably reaffirmed Voth's belief that there are serious problems with
The statewide marjiana debate rages on. Inside and beyond the walls of the state capitol building, people are vehemently expounding their arguments for and against a bill that would impose the penalties for possession of small amounts of marijuana.
Shortly before spring break, the debate came to Lawrence. Rep. Mike Glover, D-Lawrence, outlined the virtues of the decriminalization bill. Harold Voth, senior state attorney, and the Foundation in Topeka, elaborated the evils of such a bill.
Glover introduced the marijuana bill in the Kansas Legislature this session and has been a long-time proponent of reduced marijuana penalties. He also introduced hearings several times, always opposing the passage of a decriminalization bill.
THE DEBATE in Lawrence was a clash between strong personalities with strong prejudices and pragmatism audience. The audience was composed of mostly students, and many teachers. It was also laughed by laughing and snicker-ing at Voth's statements.
Steven Stingley Editorial writer
today's pot-smoking youth and that they need help -help that tight marijuana laws would provide.
The marijuana issue is one of open-mindedness and one of individual choice. It isn't logical or fair for one to prompore more lenient marijuana laws on the basis of individual choice and another for having a different opinion about the matter.
ONLY A person knowledge of both sides of the issue can make a reasonable judgment.
Voth does have legitimate concerns, ones that reflect the views of many Kansans who think that weakened marjana laws would give the green light to numbers of "potential" pot users.
sense. He says that the present state marijuana laws do not deter people from smoking pot and only cause disrespect for the law among young people. In addition, the state is wasting large sums of money, manpower and heartbelt attempts at enforcement of a law that is unnecessary and foolish.
Voth does see the present laws as deterrents to widespread marijuana marijuana mann. It is a difficult thing to measure. Glover's arguments, however, appear to make more
It is a matter of fitting the punishment to the crime, Glover argues and, as the law
exists now, there is a tremendous imbalance.
GLOVER also says that although the present laws are not fully enforced, the possibility that a small-time pot user will be severely punished still exists.
the proper response of the criminal justice system should not be the threat of incarceration, he says.
"We've got to have that hammer over their heads," he
The argument for lessening harsh marjuana laws appears to be a sound one. The concept has been enforced by the KBI Association, the American Medical Association, the National Council of Churches and the KBI President Jimmy Carter has been a longtime propriate penalties for marijuana use and has spurred
says. "We've got to be able to play with their person."
Yet there remain people who are fearful of the consequences of such changes in the rules of American society.
**YOUR IS among that group of people and is not afraid to say so. He says that he has a "fatherly feeling" toward drug use by youth and wants to do so. He says that weaken drug laws to help protect young people from themselves.**
Congress to lessen national penalties.
Woth says that one of the most "permissive aspects" of *marijuana* use is that "smokers don't realize the change that is taking place inside themselves" and *marijuana* pot on a regular basis.
He backs up his statements with long lists of studies to prove that marijuana is dangerously directly related and psychologically dangerous.
As a practicing psychiatrist, Voth says, he has seen people "destroyed" by using marijuana.
"It destroys the brain and the brain is the seed of the mind," he asserts.
HE RESPONDED to the snickering audience by saying, Kids, you've got to wake up to laugh. And you're going to go forward and advance your lives or are you going to get zonked on some kind of chemical?"
Voth also argued that drug use is directly related to modern problems in a society in which the importance of the family and traditional values is being shattered.
Nothing can be taken away from Voth's concerns or credibility to address those concerns. He is someone印象ed enough about human behavior to be taken seriously.
But at the same time one has to wonder whether severe penalties for the use of marijuana are more likely to the wider social and psychological problems to which Voth addresses himself.
For one thing, numerous medical studies "prove" that marijuana is not physically or psychologically harmful, just as medical studies "prove" marijuana is harmful.
ALSO, STUDIES done in states that already have reduced marjuanja penalties indicate that pot use has not been limited to the laws. The studies suggest that the harsh laws are not
deterrents when victimless crimes are involved.
And marijuana use is a victimless crime. Pot smoking in the confines of one's home is not going to hurt anyone. The only possible problem is driving under the influence of marijuana or marijuana in developing tests to detect marijuana in the bloodstream so those people can be arrested.
Nevertheless, Voth feels the need to protect the smokers from themselves because he causes them social evil. It is an earnest concern, but one that cannot be weighed heavily in considering the merits of a discriminational law, as it is more substantially proved.
There is too much evidence on the other side of the coin. There is too much personal liberty and freedom of choice at stake.
There is too much danger involved when the state attempts to legislate and enforce a specific brand of morality.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
KANSAN
Published at the University of Kwauser daily August 14, 2015. Subscriptions to *The College* June and July eaxcess Saturday, September 20 and holiday Monday, September 26 and Saturday, October 14, 2015. Subscriptions by mail are $8 per month or $15 for a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are $15 per month.
Editor Barbara Rosewicz
Publisher
David Darn