Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Ann Premer, Editor Jamie Holman, Business manager Gerry Doyle, Managing editor Sara Cropper, Retail sales manager Angie Kuhn, Managing editor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Wednesday, February 3, 1999
Jamie Patterson / KANSAN
Editorial
Dole Institute's gain hurts educators
The Robert J. Dole Institute for Public Service and Public Policy will be a welcome addition to the University of Kansas, but its federal financing is shameful.
The University will receive $6 million from the federal government for the Dole Institute. The money earmarked for the University was taken from another, more important federal program.
In January, the U.S. Department of Education canceled its annual competition for the Fund for the Improvement of Postsecondary Education (FIPSE), after Congress decided to spend the money on representatives' and senators' pet projects.
Last year, the education department awarded $25.2 million in grants to support innovative solutions to problems in higher education. The education department was ready to hand out another 1,700 grants this
Congress should not have taken money away from innovative education program.
year, but Congress had a different plan.
The House and Senate increased FIPSE's money to $50 million, but instead of giving the money to educators in the form of grants, the money must go to national projects like the Dole Institute.
FIPSE gave money to educators who improved education and bettered students' lives. When Congress killed the program, it sent a message that improving education is not a top priority.
Worse, the University is among the organizations stealing this money.
Officials at the University had little to
do with the allocation. But the money is tainted, and the University should have been apprehensive to accept it, if not turned it down all together.
The Dole Institute will cost $6 million to build. The Kansas Legislature has given the University $3 million, and another $3 million is from private donations. That means that the federal money was not a necessity.
Burdett Loomis, director of the Dole Institute, said the $6 million in federal money probably would create an endowment for institute programs and would pay for processing Dole's official papers.
Some of that money also should be set aside for a program that gives grants to Kansas educators who find innovative ways to improve higher education.
It only seems fair.
Spencer Duncan for the editorial board
Feedback
KU Ambassador's tale really isn't accurate
Recently, one of my daughters, a KU student, called to my attention an article in the Dec. 2 issue of The University Daily Kansan regarding the fine work of the KU Ambassadors. One portion of that article was very interesting to me and quoted Carrie Dempenhub, a KU Ambassador, retelling a part of the history of Hoch Auditorium.
She stated, "They used to play basketball in the basement of Hoch Auditorium, but since there was limited seating, you could only buy tickets for half of a game, either the first or second half. There were crimson tickets for one half and blue tickets for the other half."
Although I attended the University in the 1950s and remember watching many fine basketball games in Hoch Auditorium (not Hoch Basement), I have no recollection of seeing only one half of any game which is probably because I and most other students saw
the entirety of every game we attended. Therefore, I feel like I need to clarify what the Ambassadors are telling campus visitors. As Dependush correctly states, Hoch was not large enough to accommodate all of the students who wanted to attend games. Consequently, a season ticket plan was devised (by whom I never knew) through which the complete schedule of home games was divided into two sub-scheduled. For example, if the complete schedule included 12 home games, sub-schedule 1 included six of the home games, and sub-schedule 2 included the other six of the home games. Then, on a first come, first served basis, students picked up their season tickets choosing to attend the six games making up sub-schedule 1 or the six games making up sub-schedule 2. Students did not choose between seeing the first half of the games and the second half of the games.
I can understand how the Hoch myth evolved, but I can't understand how anyone would believe and retell it. It is
humorous to imagine a scenario in which the Hoch public address announcer requests at halftime of a close KU-MU game that all students in the building need to rush home to their radios and Max Falkenstien so that another group of students can come in and see the second half. It is difficult to envision students filing out in an orderly fashion (or leaving at all) in 1954 or, for that matter, in 1999.
In brief, 1950s KU student basketball fans saw all of half the games, not half of all the games. It is easy to see how the misunderstanding occurred. I hope that this somewhat entertaining chapter in KU history can be corrected before it is told again.
Larry Hannah KU Class of '57
Editor's Note: According to Richard Konzem, associate athletic director, and Tom Hutton, director of University Relations, Hannah's recollection is correct.
Kansan staff
Ryan Koener . . . Editorial
Jeremy Doherty . . . Associate Editorial
Aaron Marvin . . . News
Laura Roddy . . . News
Melissa Ngo . . . News
Aaron Knopf . . Online
Erin Thompson . . Sports
Marc Sheforden . . Associate sports
Chris Fickett . . Campus
Sarah Hale . . Campus
T.R. Miller . . Features
Steph Brewer .Associate features
Augustus Anthony Piazza . Photo
Chris Dye . Design, graphics
Carl Kaminski . . Wire
Carolyn Mollett .Special sections
Laura Veazey . news clerk
News editors
Advertising managers
Matt Lopez . Special Sections
Jennifer Patch . Campus
Micah Kafitz . Regional
Jon Schlitt . National
Tyler Cook . Marketing
Shannon Curran . PR/Intern manager
Christa Estep . Production
Steven Prince . Production
Chris Corley . Creative
Jason Hannah . Classified
Corinne Buffmire . Zone
Shauntae Blue . Zone
Brandi Byram . Zone
Brian Allers . Zone
Justin Allen . Zone
Broaden your mind: Today's quote
"I have a theory that the truth is never told during the nine-to-five hours."
Hunter S. Thompson
How to submit letters and guest columns
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 home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
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 submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staufer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions. For any questions, call Ryan Koerner or Jeromy DeHerrity at 864-4924.
If you have general questions or comments,
e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com)
or call 864-4924.
Perspective
Significance of Pope importance of icons not clear to teen-ager
My 19-year-old son, who is not yet college educated and not yet Catholic, made an agitated remark the other
day regarding the visit of Pope John Paul II to St. Louis last week.
Simmie Berroya
opinion @ kansan.com
He had been watching the news in which some young people were being interviewed on the street and gave their reactions.
My son's exclamation went something like this: "One kid said that the pope was the closest thing to being God on earth! No human being
can be closer to being God than another!"
My response to my son came in the form of a question: "Are you Catholic?" "No." was his reply.
"Then how can you possibly understand the context or implication of this person's statement?" I asked.
At this point, he seemed in favor of changing the subject, which I agreed with simply because I didn't feel like arguing with him at the time.
Later, I started thinking about it, and came to the conclusion that my son didn't understand the importance of icons.
But icons are important in the religious world.
I believe that another reason the Catholic teenagers in America get so excited to see the pope is that he is the major icon of their faith. Because he's the head of the Catholic Church, he represents Christ on Earth in the greatest sense. He is an icon because he embodies all the teachings and traditions of the church.
Before I switched to a Catholic perspective, I didn't know what an icon was. I thought it just was a computer term used to describe the tool bar of a computer screen.
They are symbols of something that is too great in size or worth to attach the entire language symbol expression to it every time we talk or think about it. We need an image that represents the whole thing.
Because icons make it real to them. For most people who were in St. Louis those few days, it was the first time — and probably the last — to see a pope in person.
So why is this so important to young people?
Throughout the pope's visit to the Mid
However, most Catholics have seen the pope on television.
west, I noticed that the media kept talking about how remarkable the pope's influence was on the young people.
The press mentioned several reasons that were obvious, such as the pope having a reputation of loving young people.
I think it is a dimensional dynamic. When you see a person on television, it is two-dimensional. There may be the tiniest sense of doubt that asks, "Am I really seeing what I would see if I were there?"
So, what's the difference?
When you see someone in person, even though you may not be close enough to see clearly the details you would see on television, you are seeing three-dimensionally, causing reasoning to kick in and say, "Yes, he is real, for I have seen him with my own eyes."
Pope John Paul II is a living icon that represents a church that is 2,000 years old. He represents a faith that has survived two millenniums of adversity and darkness—and is still triumphant.
Berroya is an Olathe senior in communication studies.
Short skirt, black boots spark friends'scoffing
Clothes make the man. While I know my parents did not originate the saying, I will attribute it to them because I have heard it from them so many times. For a
long as I can remember,
my parents have told me
that the way you dress
makes a statement about
who you are.
Sydney Wallace
ooinion @ kansan.com
And I always have believed them, at least to an extent.
I always have tried to dress appropriately for the occasion and always have dressed up for presentations, job interviews and holidays.
It was the first Friday night of the new semester, and a friend of mine from work was having a party. I don't really know exactly why, but I decided to wear a skirt. It was a short skirt, but I didn't really think anything about wearing it out.
When I dressed that evening, I thought I looked good. Yes, I was more dressed up than usual, but I figured that there would be lots of girls dressed up at the party, because black pants seem to be the Friday night uniform for so many girls at the University of Kansas.
The afternoon of the party I was out shopping, and on the spur of the moment, I bought some black boots that reach to just below my knees. They were on sale, and I recently had admired a similar pair on a friend.
Heck, sometimes you will catch me in a skirt for no reason at all.
Because I just had bought the boots, I decided to wear them to the party that evening with my skirt.
Needless to say, I have learned that what you wear affects how people think of you. But it wasn't until two weekends ago that I realized how powerful clothing can be.
My first hint that I was going to raise some eyebrows came only moments after dressing, when I walked out into my own living room.
One of my closest friends started laughing at me, and my roommate's boyfriend asked me if that was what I was wearing.
In my typical fashion, I became defensive and tried to justify wearing a skirt and
boots out on a Friday night to my friends. While they told me they still would be friends with me if I wore the outfit, they were still a bit hesitant about my choice.
We left my apartment to pick up a few people before heading to the party. When I went in to get two of my guy friends, I again was given the third degree about my outfit. When I got mad, they backed off but not until they muttered something about just not being used to seeing me dressed like that.
I again wondered what was so shocking to everyone.
We made it to the party and within 30 seconds of walking through the front door, I was being hassled about my attire. Some of my friends were making cat calls at me and saying they "never expected to see me in an outfit like that." I didn't know what the right response was anymore, so I just smiled and told them that wonders never cease.
After a few minutes, things calmed down around me, but every time I encountered a friend for the first time that night, they made some comment about my outfit. While most people told me I looked really good, they expressed a bit of surprise to see me dressed in such a way.
My friends still were joking about it even days after the fact.
I really had a good time that night, but the controversy I had caused with one outfit continued to puzzle me.
Until the night that I wore a short skirt with boots, I had presented a very different image with my clothing. An image that those people close to me had become comfortable with. When I wore something in contrast to the image I presented, people couldn't help but be confused.
I finally have decided that the uproar I caused must be simply because clothes really do make a person.
While I will not let one Friday night of commotion keep me from wearing my skirt and boots, I will know to expect a dramatic response the next time I put them on.
Clothes may help make me who I am, but I never will let them dictate who I always must be.
Wallace is an Overland Park sophomore in pre-journalism.