Opinion
The University Daily Kansan
Laura Roddy, Editor
Sarah Hale, Managing editor
Kristi Ellott, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news advisor
4A
Shauntea Blue, Business manager
Brad Bolyard, Retail sales manager
Matt Fisher, Sales and marketing adviser
Scott Valler, Technology coordinator
Friday, April 21, 2000
TF I WERE ON "WHO WANTS TO BE A MILLIONAIRE?"
First Last / KANSAN
Editorials
Kansan report card
PASS
Relays — After a two-year cool down the Kansas Relays
cool down, the Kansas Retails are back. Get out to Memorial Stadium today and tomorrow, watch some athleticism and bask in the sun's metallically enhanced glory.
ored at Tuesday's Women's Recognition Program. Congrats to all for your outstanding work for the University of Kansas.
Award winners — Eleven leaders hon-
- Finally — New policy would standardize finals absence guidelines for all classes. It's a good thing, because an outbreak of serious ailments is about to occur —
FAIL
Get on the bus — New citywide bus system misses chance for clever name. Instead, it will be known as "The T". Proposed slogan for the public Mass Street cruiser: 'Hey Tongie kids, leave that rusty F-150 at home and hop on the T.'
ruling seems to ensure that the nightmare will never ever, end.
Amatur video — Elian's Miami relatives continue to manipulate the Cuban Pinochio. New court
■ End of semester blues — Renegade professors will undoubtedly continue to ignore rules and assign tests and projects due on or the week before Stop Day.
Parking permit fee hike unnecessary
The University Council recently passed yet another proposal to raise parking permit fees.
The council voted 9-6 in favor of a 15 percent increase in the prices of red, yellow and blue permits. This would increase annual prices of yellow permits from $75 to $86.25, red permits from $55 to $109.25 and blue permits from $110 to $126.50. This proposal, introduced by Barbara Romzek, professor of public administration and government, might be acceptable if the new money generated would go to something new or something that directly affects a majority of students. But instead, the price increase supposedly is being used to finance the new parking garage near the Kansas Union.
This is unacceptable because during the last few years, the University of Kansas already has raised ticket fines and the costs of meters and permits to accommodate the new parking garage. Now the University wants to raise permit fees again. Why does the University need even more money from students' pockets? What else can more fee increases finance — valet parking for faculty?
The University is treading on thin ice with students with repeated fee increases
The increase was enacted to cancel the parking board's latest proposal, which suggested that students who want to park in the two parking garages should pay $175 for a permit. This proposal would make the 300 spaces available to students on a first-come, first-serve basis. The 15 percent increase would generate $145,000, which surpasses the $143,675 that would be generated by the board's proposal.
Despite valid arguments from both sides, there remains a sensible solution — don't raise prices at all. Making 12,000 permit holders pay 15 percent more next year for the support of 300 parking spots in a parking
With this most recent proposal, one begins to wonder where all the money is going. Also, with tickets being given away like candy during Halloween, it is hard to believe that there is a shortage of funds.
The vote probably would have been swayed in the opposite direction by student University Council members who did not attend the meeting, probably because it was Student Senate election day. Students certainly would not have voted for this proposal. A vote to substantially raise fees for students shouldn't have been conducted without student representation.
garage they never will see just doesn't make sense. Also, the board's proposal would make the garage congested and dangerous with drivers looking for a few precious spots.
In terms of parking fees, the University is treading on thin ground with the student body. It seems as if there is a new controversy about parking every week. Now the final decision is up to Chancellor Robert Hemenway and Provost David Shulenburger. There is hope, though, because Hemenway promised two years ago that he would not increase permit prices for three years. It is hoped that Hemenway will live up to his word. But after the recent permit increase, students shouldn't be surprised by anything.
How to submit letters and guest columns
Eric Borja for the editorial board
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be e-mailed to opinion@kansan.com or submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Nadia Mustafa or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
“A computer lets you make more mistakes faster than any invention in human history — with the possible exceptions of hardware and tequila.” Mitch Raliff
That's a question that many people have been asking since the Kansan published "Student Senate candidates' records checked" in
Why did the Kansan print the results of background checks on Student Senate candidates?
Laura
Roddy
editor
editor@kansan.com
the April 12 edition. It listed 15 candidates, all of whom had been charged with alcohol-related offenses in Lawrence Municipal Court or Douglas County District Court. One was for driving under the influence of alcohol, and the rest were for minors in possession of alcohol.
The answer is not that the Kansan wanted to embarrass the candidates. Checking backgrounds of candidates for public
office is a common practice among good newspapers and something the Kansan has done regularly.
It's important. too.
It's important, too.
Kansan background checks revealed in 1995 that a candidate for social welfare student senator had been convicted of aggravated indecent solicitation of a child under the age of 12. Without the Kansan's background checks, the student body would not have known.
The question for Kansan editors, though, was where the line should be drawn. Our decision was that if we conducted background checks — which clearly we should — the most objective way to handle the results would be to publish all of them. We didn't want the Kansan to make that value judgment for its readers, so we left it up to them.
Background checks run for fairness, consistency
Most people would find that kind of information relevant to the election. Those same people, though, may wonder how these alcohol-related offenses, fairly common among
Publishing results of background checks sets a relevant precedent. Although alcohol-related convictions may not seem like major flaws, they provide a base by which everyone is judged. Often, alcohol convictions are the only things the Kansan finds, but when other, more serious crimes show up, it does not appear as though the paper is "picking" on those candidates — they are evaluated by the same standard as everyone else.
Because none of the charges were felonies, the Kansan just ran the results of the background checks as a simple list.
A valid criticism is the timing of the background checks, which were published the first day of elections. Ideally, the results should have been published a week earlier. The reason they weren't was simply because the Kansan's search of court records wasn't processed until then. In the future, requests should be made as soon as the elections commission releases the official list of candidates.
As always, the Kansan appreciates your feedback. Keep your comments coming.
students and considered "minor," would affect candidates' abilities to serve in Senate.
Perspective
Roddy is a Andover senior in school in journalism and Spanish.
Politicians and pundits misrepresent the NRA
John H.
McCool
guest columnist
opinion@kansan.com
most recent and scurrious charges leveled against it. The anti-gun lobby and its political allies have for too long grossly misrepresented the NRA's position on gun control. Moreover, its personal attacks against the organization's leaders are simply unfair and unfounded.
As a proud member of the Nationa Rifle Association, I feel compelled to defend the organization against the
Several weeks ago, NRA Vice President
The popular reaction was somewhat short of hysterical. Countless politicians and pundits took to the airwaves, denouncing the organization, calling LaPierre "insane" and echoing the vulgar refrain that blames
Wayne LaPierre said on national television that President Clinton was "willing to accept a certain level of violence and killing in America in order to further his political agenda."
the NRA for school shootings and a myriad of other bloody gun crimes. The blame is, however, wholly misplaced.
But, LaPierre was fully justified in his charges against the president. Last summer, Clinton was offered a comprehensive, bipartisan gun-control bill (H.R. 1501) that included virtually everything he had ever asked for. This included mandatory trigger locks with every new gun, a prohibition against violent juveniles ever owning guns (so-called Juvenile Brady), mandatory background checks at gun shows with a three-day wait and an import ban on high-capacity magazines. The NRA fully supported this bill and urged the president to sign it. He refused. Why? Why would Clinton refuse to sign such tough gun-control legislation? He rejected it all on an astonishingly dubious pretext: He said he wanted a five-day wait on checks at gun shows. Thus, by spurring a most reasonable (almost trivial) compromise, the president let the bill die on his desk.
The NRA has received such a bad name because anti-gun politicians and pundits have been so successful — and so ruthless — in misrepresenting its stance on gun control. They've slyly and cynically diverted the public's attention away from the real causes of gun violence in America today; the criminals who misuse guns and the administration that tolerates them — true partners in crime.
McCool is an Evansville, Ind., graduate student in history.
4
But, in reality, it was dead on arrival because Clinton would rather have gun control as a political club with which to beat Republicans during an election year — or any year — than enact laws he claims to support. How would he be able to shamelessly dema-
Then, the idea that the NRA fundamenta $n_1$ opposes reasonable gun-control measures is clearly untrue as evidenced by its support of last summer's bill mandating the sale of trigger locks with all new guns, among other tough provisions. In fact, the organization's aims are, and always have been, to promote gun safety and responsible ownership of firearms; to preserve all Americans' constitutional right to possess guns if they so choose to defend themselves, their families and their property; and to support the strict enforcement of laws as the only means to prevent crime. When the NRA does oppose gun-control measures, it's on the grounds that the law will do nothing to reduce gun crime and only will harass and/or disarm law-abiding citizens.
What's more, the Justice Department's abysmal lack of enforcement of the 20,000-plus gun laws on the books is scandalous, bordering on criminal itself. Federal gun prosecutions are way down, yet the administration insists that the way to reduce crime is to pass more laws — more laws that wouldn't be enforced, to be sure.
Thus, LaPierre's charges were not only perfectly sane, but they also were another stinging indictment of this appallingly corrupt and unethical administration.
gogue the gun issue and portray Republicans as evil, right-wing extremists who want to kill children if he had signed last summer's Republican and NRA-supported gun control bill? He couldn't.
So, because the president refuses to sign gun bills that contain things he claims to want, and because his administration has been so derelict in its duty to enforce tough gun laws, we must conclude that he doesn't really want what he says he wants. The one true constant for President Clinton, though, has been his obscene and unrelenting demonstration of Republicans and the NRA; they are his real targets, not those who commit heinous gun crimes.
News editors
Kansan staff
Seth Hoffman . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editorial
Nadia Mustafa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . Editorial
Melody Ard . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News/Special sections
Chris Fickett . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News
Julie Wood . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . News
Juan H. Heath . . . . . . . . . . . Online
Mike Miller . . . . . . . . . . . . Sports
Matt James . . . . . . . . . . . Associates sports
Katie Hollar . . . . . . . . . Campus
Nathan Willis . . . . . . . . . . Campus
Heather Woodward . . . . Features
Chris Borniger . . . . . . . . Jayplay
T.J. Johnson . . . . . Photo imaging
Christina Neff . . . . . Photo
Jason Pearce . . . . Design, graphics
Clay McQuistion . . . Wire
Advertising managers
Advertising managers
Becky LaBranch . . . Special sections
Krista Lindemann . . . Campus
Ryan Riggin . . . Regional
Jason Hannah . . . National
Will Baxter . . . Online sales
Patrick Rupe . . . Online creative
Seth Schwimmer . . . Marketing
Jenny Weaver . . . Creative layout
Matt Thomas . . . Assistant creative
Kenna Crone . . . Assistant creative
Trent Guyer . . . Classifieds
Jon Schiltt . . . Zone
Thad Crane . . . Zone
Cecily Curran . . Zone
Christy Davies . . Zone