1.
Thursday, February 9, 1978
University Daily Kansan
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN-
Comment
Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the Kanan editorial staff. Signed columns represent the views of only the writers.
Laetrile bill is just
Should the people of Kansas be protected from their own potential folly in being able to purchase Laetrile, a drug that supposedly fights cancer?
Only a doctor's prescription would be necessary for cancer victims to buy Leaertle, a drug extracted from apricot pits. Only a prescription would be necessary for terminally ill patients to gain the hope of being cured, almost certainly nothing else.
lung cured, amnesiac but should be legalized. The drug, however, should be legalized. It should be legalized with quality-control safeguards, to ensure an unadulterated product. It also should be legalized with the explicit understanding that manufacturers of the drug would be allowed to make no claims whatsoever about its possible curative properties, which have yet to be demonstrated.
SENATE SUPPORTERS make no pretense about the fact that Laetrile, even after exhaustive medical research, has not
been shown to work. But this is, above all, an election year—and legalizing Laetrile is popular.
For example, State Sen. Jan Meyers, R-Overland Park, voted for the bill in committee. She wants to succeed retiring U.S. Sen. James Pearson and said that, despite reservations, she "voted for the bill because there seems to be a situation in Kansas now in which the public favors the use of Laetrile."
Later on, despite the obvious political motivations behind the bill, it is still justified. What does not harm people does not deserve to be banned, especially under the paternalistic pretense that government always knows best. Criminal prosecutions for the marketing of apricot pits are a gross waste of time, particularly in a nation that allows, for openers, the marketing of alcohol and tobacco.
It would be unfortunate if cancer patients in Kansas were to use Laetrile as a substitute for conventional treatments. But doctors, who would have to prescribe the drug, surely are wiser than to allow that—wiser than government that glories in superfluous regulations.
Dean's inaction assailed
KANSAN Letters
To the editor:
I am writing this letter to challenge two aspects of the University dorm policy. First, I would like to know why the university does essentially nothing about serious noise problems in the dorms. Second, I would like to know why the dean told me to took over a task to decide not to do anything about such a problem after initially telling us it would attempt to solve it.
Because of problems we were having with loud stereos in McCollum Hall last semester, three of us went to the dean of men's office. We were to find that the policy of that office is to force those that of office is bothered by noise to move outside the problem. Their rationale for this is that to move those who are making the noise would merely place the problem on someone else.
I would like to know on what basis the University, or at least the dean's office, justifies this policy. It does not explain how one can move into the vacated room. It is also unclear why in this particular contract area there is a reluctance to act, when in other areas there has been fairly strict adherence to strict procedures, and little doubt that payment provisions will be enforced.
Many dorm residents have been surprised to find holidays, such as Thanksgiving, not included in the contract. Further.
the contract requires students to leave following spring semester on Saturday morning before finals. This is in spite of the fact that some dorms have remained open beyond that time for those who were somewhat harbored for those having finals the last day.
Aside from the policy itself, I would also like to know why the dean's office handled our inquiry the way it did. We were assured that an attempt would be made to solve our problem and hoped we would be called when it was. After a week, however, we found a resident director that nothing could or would be done. No real attempt was made during that time, to my knowledge, to either verify or disprove our complaints.
What is very strange about the whole situation is that, while it took the dean's office a whole week to decide nothing could be done, after a lawyer called for a hearing, he or so to decide that something could be done. I'm not sure why the things we had said the week before became more believable. Anyway, the dean and I were suddenly verifying and disproving everything.
While it was gratifying to see someone take an interest in our problems, it was also irritating to realize that it took the threat of legal action to spark that interest. It is important that policy that is based on something as capricious as the fear of a lawsuit?
Energy article sparks retort To the editor:
John Barkstrom
We have been closely following the splendid work and achievements of the Institute for Creation Research (ICR) in their heroic struggle for "equal time" against the arrogant enemy of science, by their open-mindedness and objectivity. Seeing that there is now a break in the wall of scientific dogmatism, we feel the battle has only just begun and call upon all enlightened individuals, creationists including boat persecuted by "scientists", i.e. the periodic table of elements.
Westmont, Ill., law student
Table, indeed! We submit that, since the theory of four elements (earth, air, fire and water) is grounded in thousands of years of historical research and we violate the Second Law of Quantum Mechanics, then it should receive equal exposure in scientific texts along with its own explanations, easier to memorize. It is obvious that modern technological evils, such as short-wave radio and the hydrogen bomb are a direct result of man's attempts to enrich our elements. Moreover, the periodic law contradicts the teachings of Plato and has more elements than a car has wheels. If two's sum is 10, what are we doing with 108 elements? We rest our case!
Overland Park senior
Jon K. Jones
Overland Park senior
Mention Social Security and the young wage earner erupts in paroxysms of disgust.
The Social Security program covers more than 90 percent of the working population and annually pays more than $2 billion in benefits and their dependents in a variety of programs. Old-age and survivors benefits account for about three-quarterst of the total benefits operating with payroll tax-financed trust
Social Security change is due
No one enjoys having slices of income withheld from his wages. But is Social Security, which is essentially a means of transferring income from productive to unproductive members, really an exorbitant program?
WHEN THE Social Security Act was passed by Congress in 1935 the plan resembled a work plan for workers, who during their working lives would pay money into the plan, would be guaranteed a sound course of employment or become unable to continue working. The amount of benefits received by a worker after retirement must equal the amount of money he paid into the system during his working life.
Social Security, according to its founders, is a pay-as-you-go plan; each generation of workers finances the old-age benefits of the previous generation.
Debate about the enormously complicated Social Security plan usually focuses on how the program grows. A major concern is that, as the number of beneficiaries increases, the program increases payroll taxes to keep with inflation.
Critics of the current system note that the trust funds for oldage, survivors and disability benefits are drying up. Payments of benefits exceeded fund income by about $5.6 billion during 2017, but fund for disability payments is now to be exhausted by 1979. The fund for old-age and survivors benefits will be depleted in 1983, unless the system's financing is changed
Deficits are expected to increase annually unless changes are made in the method of determining bene- tures or ways of financing the income performance program as a whole.
THE HAGGLING over what to do with the system attracts political attention. Tax cuts to offset the "drag" created by increases in Social Security payroll taxes vary from a proposed $54 billion to $12 billion.
Outlays under the Old Age and Survivors Insurance program were estimated at about 4 percent of the nation's national product, a broad indicator of the nation's prosperity.
When we quarrel about Social Security, aren't we ignoring our attitudes toward those in the country? We can't build the nation's national prosperity?
"The young generation, compared to the old, is a bunch of cheapestaps," Ronald Olsen, CEO of Bayer, said of economics, said Tuesday.
Every culture must decide
how to treat its older and nonproductive members. Social Security, essentially a means of transferring income from productive to unproductive members, can be provided by those of those who have helped to build our economy. But like many other solutions to fundamental problems Social Security has become mired in difficulty or obscure the job the program was designed to accomplish.
THE CONCEPTION of Social Security as a pay-as-you-go plan, similar to a private insurance policy, appears to have diminished in importance since 1939 when the system reflected a concern for the nation's social adequacy. Leaders began to teach that citizens should achieve fair distribution of income to older members of society. Equity for former wage earners was seen as the
primary reason for the program's existence.
Economic analysts who view Social Security as society's debt to its members who have contributed but haven't earned a great amount assert that the system is a means of achieving fair distribution of the "pie" by encouraging transgender workers in the working population find that the Social Security payroll tax hits them harder than it does the more affluent wage earners.
Increasing payroll taxes earned for Social Security payments exasperates economists who predict that with unemployment at about 6.8 percent and price increases predicted near the 5.9 percent rate the tax cuts will increase all unemployment and inflation worse. The tax cuts, whether $12 billion or $44 billion, are regarded as little more than a placebo.
YOUNG WAGE earners are the source of Social Security benefits. Social Security Fund trustees estimate that during the next 75 years the average payroll tax will have to increase by about $1,000 per rate provided by law today, which is designed to balance payments and税收 receipts. The system will have to be changed.
How will wage earners, like recent college graduates, distribute the pie? As progeny of social security boom leave the ranks of workers, increasing the number of Social Security beneficiaries, and increasing the number of Social Security system be adequate? Or Will Social Security, already the biggest federal program, be redefined as the primary means for a worker in a fair share of the gross national product "pie"?
Handicapped students deserve attention
Dana Wray, Tongonacie graduate student, is in a dilemma that few students can even appreciate. Wray is a quadriplegic who commutes to the University of Kansas from her room at Lawrence's Cherry Manor nursing home.
Actually, Wray is lucky to still call Cherry Manor "home." Only two weeks ago she was facing eviction because the nursing home couldn't afford to care for her any more. Wray is feeling more secure lately because the state has made sure she still has a place to live, but she is far from content.
Understandably, Wray thinks that handicapped students ought to be able to live somewhere besides in a nursery
She wants more. But what Wray considers "more" is taken for granted by people who aren't handcuffed. And she can understand that, four years ago, Wray says, she didn't stop to think about how lucky she was to be able to lift a手kiercherche to her nose and blow out the air, but any more, but she hasn't forgotten that she once could.
WRAY HASN'T forgotten much about her first 20 years, before she was hand-capped for life. Although she is not the type to indulge in self-pity and is grateful for all that hainings can be so far, Wray has made many things can be improved for handicapped students at KU.
Pat Allen Editorial writer
home. In compliance with the Federal Rehabilitation Act of 1973, KU is obliged to modify buildings so they are accessible to the handicapped. The deadline for meeting recommendations by a University task force is June 1980. Oliver Hall currently is the only residence hall accessible by handicapped men. R. Pearson Hall is the only residence hall accessible to handicapped men.
Although some handicapped students are taking advantage of the modified residence halls, there are no accommodations for students who need total care, as does Wray. It is realistic to expect a school to provide total care for the 20 or so handicapped children enrolled in EMU but KU do more as a mediator between students who need care and students willing to provide it.
Harlan Harber, assistant to the KU dean of men, said that none of KU's handicapped students had ever made such arrangements but none would be done. KU's residence halls advertise for American students who are interested in living with
and assisting foreign students in their adjustment to the United States. Why couldn't the same interest in and assistance be given to the handicapped?
EVEN IF the residence halls were completely accessible to students who needed total care, Wray wouldn't be interested. Because she is older than the average undergraduate, Wray said, which means the residence hall just annotated form of institution.
She said that the ideal kind of residence would be an on-campus house that handicapped students and student aides could share. No plans have even been started for such a project because—unless this problem no one knows who all the members of KU's handicapped population are.
Two assistants to the dean of men are responsive in dealing with the handicapped, Wray said, but she added that there should be a student organization for handicapped students. There would, of course, be a student organization and other student groups on campus—the handicapped peed others' help to organize.
SEVERAL KU students and faculty members are concerned about the conditions for the handicapped. at the beginning of the semester, some of Wray's friends from classes in the School of Social Welfare circulated a petition
that called for alternate housing for the handicapped. State Rep. Lloyd Buzzi, R-Lawrence, has sponsored a bill that is now in the House Ways and Means Committee. The bill would provide alternate housing facilities statewide.
There also is much federal support for a bill U.S. Sen. Robert Dole, R-Kan., introduced in the Senate this week. Dole's bill would require medical expenses from their gross income before they are judged on whether they qualify for medical benefits. Mary Wheat, Dole's legislative assistant, said in a telephone conversation that a handcapped person might currently earn $500 a month, have $400 in medical expenses, but be ineligible for assistance because his income exceeded $200. The bill would allow a disabled person with an unintentional stroke to rely on public welfare.
In the last few years, interest in the plight of the handcapped has increased. But more important than the new legislation to allow such a architectural handcapping must be made to feel that they still belong. Being handcapped takes a lot of time and money. It doesn't cost much, though, for non-handcapped students. But it demands conversation with a disabled student. It's the least the non-handcapped can do.
KUAC's lack of respect for students insensitive
By STEVE LEBEN
Guest Writer
Two years ago, Ed Rolfs, outgoing student body president, pointed to a "total lack of sensitivity by the faculty member over the past three years," resulting in "understandings, commitments and working relationships being lost and ignored." I hope Ed won't be too hard on him, but successor feels the same way.
The University of Kansas Athletic Corporation, led by Clyde Walker, has no respect for students, student opinion or student representation in the university management of the KUAC—but not as important as alumni money or public money. So it assumes that it can make decisions about students—their tickets, their room numbers, their continuing students. KUAC is all-knowing, all-powerful.
THE LATEST example of KUAC omniscience involves student seating at basketball games. Jerry Waugh, assistant athletic director, told me recently that there will be only reserved seats in the basketball games next year. That's a fairly major change from being able to sit anywhere in the student section to having specified seats for the whole season. It didn't dawn on him
that students hadn't even been consulted. But it just doesn't occur to the KUAC that it should ask students for their opinion, even when only students are affected by a decision.
A similar situation occurred last fall while the football ticket surcharge was being debated at a KUAC board meeting. Suddenly, in a fit of compassion, Walker suggested that student tickets could be offered next week to students with bowl-in case students didn't want to pay the higher prices for their regular seats.
NONE OF the student board members even knew that this had been discussed. My immediate vision was of the Nebraska basketball team with red during the Nebraska and Oklahoma games, while our students sat behind the end zone. KU students would not be sitting in a section for which they pay corporation bond fees. But it looked more like a worn bone thrown to the hounds.
Even setting the time for board meetings has become controversial, thanks to student students. Student board members, supported by those faculty members who believe that their meeting should not be asked not to have board meetings during class time.
The problem was discussed at a board meeting, and many possible meeting times were suggested. Notice the new meeting during class time. Did reason prevail? Of course not. The next
One meeting last spring was held when all of the student board members had final exams.
IT MAKES little difference to Walker, though, when the board meets. It's not really that important to him, even though the board theoretically sets KUAC policy. Walker didn't even
KUAC board meeting will be at 10:30 on a Friday morning, forcing students and faculty to move the classroom between classes and the KUAC.
Perhaps the clearest example of KUAC's thinking has been the selling of student season basketball tickets that were sold this year than two years ago, mainly because students weren't sure how good a team we'd have. They found out in the KUAC officials by their KUAC officials were no longer willing to sell student tickets. They had to save their credibility, they said, because they couldn't afford a deadline for ticket-buying at the first home game.
ACTUALLY, the deadline did change, although most of you never knew it. The KUAC, prompted by a University administrator who honestly tries to meet students' sales for three days, but KUAC never announced it. Only those students who already taught the KUAC had no credibility—and didn't believe the KUAC would hold to its announced tickets in the student's tickets. Those of you who trusted the KUAC's word lost out.
Not that there weren't complaints. The KUAC received many, and so did the Student Senate. I called Doug Messer, assistant athletic director for business affairs, to see whether something couldn't be done because so many
NO, ED, things haven't changed at the KUAC. And they probably won't as long as Clyde Walker is in charge. You can't teach an old dog new tricks; Walker is more than content with continuing to refine his old ones.
students still wanted tickets and there were still plenty of seats available in Allen Field House. But Messer said that the extension of the sales period had been a secret to save the KUAC's credibility and that to extend it any further also would damage its credibility. Most people in government feel that secrecy—leads to greater credibility. But the KUAC is a strange animal that rarely lets logic stand in its way.
Steve Leeben is outgoing student body president and has served as ex officio member of the KUAC board.
The examples I've given of problems with Walker and his staff are by no means complete. They include only the past year while I've been student body leader, and complete list for Walker's tenure would be staggering. Walker has to answer to only one man—the chancellor and the chancellor of a museum of things to do with his time than keep watch over the athletic director.
Are you mad as hell and don't want to take it any more? Write Chancellor Dykes. I have.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Published at the University of Kansas daily August 15, 2016, at 8:00 a.m. Published on June 7 and July 12 except Saturday, Sunday and holiday weekdays. Subscribers are $1 a month or $18 per quarterly subscription. Subscriptions by mail are a $5 discount or $18 per quarterly subscription. A year outside the county. Student subscriptions are free. All subscriptions are nonrefundable.
Editor Barbara Rosewicz
Business Manager Patricia Thornton
Publisher
David Dary