4
Tuesday, February 19, 1974
University Daily Kansan
KANSAN
Editorials, columns and letters published on this page reflect only the opinions of the writers.
Landlords vs. Tenants
Conflicts between landlords and tenants are ancient urban feudes and they will continue as long as interest are part of human nature.
But the sorrier extremes of the conflicts and their impact on Lawrence housing could be eliminated or diminished by housing laws and cooperation between landlords and tenants.
The most notorious landlord-tenant battleground in Lawrence is on the east and north rim of the campus. Properly dubbed the student ghetto, this area is jammed with people who have stood long past their prime and haven't adjusted to old age very gracefully.
Some of the houses in the student ghetto have been carefully preserved and these charming old gargantuans reflect a colorful city heritage. But too many of the houses reflect fallen grandeur and have been left to rot by careless landlords or tenants.
Every year some of the more hazardous of the houses are condemned. But until now little attempt has been made to resolve conflicts and their eventual contributions to low-quality housing.
A landlord-tenant bill has been passed by the Kansas Senate. The bill would establish regulations for security deposits and for various self-heLP methods by which tenants can insure adequate, functional housing. Landlords have protested that the bill favored tenants, but the bill stipulates obligations for both parties.
The bill could provide a rallying point for reversing the trend of
unconcern for the quality of housing. But it will never succeed without voluntary cooperation from all concerned.
In Lawrence, landlords and tenants of low-cost housing have essentially signed a mutual irresponsibility pact. The landlord won't fix the faucet or mend the toilet; they'll about the tenants' tidiness, personal lives, pets or tardiness in paying the rent.
In this impersonal arrangement, a landlord simply won't appear on the property either to keep it safe or to bother the tenant about loud noises or "hippie" friends. To a beagledenant who is accustomed to meddling landlords, this is a relief.
Although the system has some advantages for those who know what to expect, well-meaning landlords and tenants who want to improve the property are often stymied.
And the quality of housing suffers. Why should the landlord improve a building that will soon be abused by careless, migrant tenants? Why should a tenant improve a building that doesn't belong to him and is already in gross disrepair?
The cycle can be broken by one party's acceptance of responsibility and insistence that the other party meet obligations.
The landlord-tenant bill before the legislature will provide the legal framework needed to break the cycle. It should be a signal to businesses and residents together to improve the city's housing for everyone's benefit.
-Bill Gibson
Impeachment Opinions Concealed
Cautious Congressmen Ponder Letters from Home
By JACK NELSON
The Los Angeles Times
WASHINGTON—Rep. Jerome K. Walde, D-CaliF, begins his letters to constituents by thanking them "for supporting my efforts to impeach President Nixon."
On the other hand, Rep. Parren J. Mitchell, D-Md., and author of an impeachment resolution, wrote, "Our democratic system is threatened, not by the Russians or by the Chinese, but by the President of our nation."
Members of Congress have described the volume of mail on impeachment as the
Walde's views on impachment are well known. But the views of many congressmen aren't. And, judging from their maltreatment of the congressmen hope to keep it that way.
Three constituent wrote Rep. Donald G. Brotman, R-Colo., that they had concluded that the House should be impeached. Brotman relied that "because the House sits as a grand jury in impeachment proceedings, it would be inappropriate for me to prejudge the evidence."
Some Congressmen write that it would be inappropriate for them to take positions before the House Judiciary Committee completes its impeachment inquest.
largest they have received on any one issue. It grew to tremendous dimensions after Nixon fired special Watergate prosecutor Archibald Cox on Oct. 20.
A White House announcement Oct. 31 that two subpoenaed recordings didn't exist and the disclosure Nov. 21 that one recording contained a message of further increases in the volume of mail.
The replies by Congressmen usually have begun with an apology for the use of form letters and an explanation of the volume of mail.
"Thousands of people have written to my office expressing similar concerns," wrote Sen. Harrison A. Williams, Jr., D.N.J. "Because of the enormous volume of mail, must reply in this form, much as I would like to address a more personal answer."
Williams wrote that while he might be called to sit in judgment on the President, he would not take a duty to judge the merits of any particular impachment charges to say that I strongly support the . . . action taken by the House of Representatives beginning a formal inquiry into this matter.
The American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), which is campaigning for impeachment, has analyzed letters on impeachment from 50 senators and 211 House
members. The analysis indicates that a large majority haven't formed opinions or made decisions.
The analysis, according to Charles Morgan Jr., director of the ACLU's staff, showed that the
Among House members, 28 favored impeachment, 74 were learning toward impeachment, 90 were against impeachment, 32 were not impeached and 68 were noncommittal.
Among Senate members, 7 favored impeachment, 19 were leaning toward impeachment, 5 were against impeachment, 2 were noncommitted in impeachment and 17 were noncommitted.
Even letters from Congressmen opposed to or leaning against impeachment may include some criticism of the President. Congressmen are members of Congress defend the President.
Rep. Robert H. Miellet, R-II., wrote that there had been "far too much tamper, inmuendo and loose rhetoric about the President's possible deeds and presumed motives. He has yet to be found guilty of anything other than having some appointees and associates accused and others already found guilty of misdeeds."
Michel said that "if any investigation clearly proves the President has violated the law or obstructed justice," he would have thought" to support impachment.
Passman of Lousiana, who wrote that Nixon's integrity "is unimpeachable."
The strongest defense of the President came from a Democrat—Rep. Otte, E.
"I don't condone the Watergate break-in by some of Mr. Nixon's nikon." Passman wrote in remember that they did not break into the Department of waterquarters looking for silver or gold. It was Doubless, they were looking for political information, periapsis trying to find out how much money appeared in Miami to support McGovern had gotten control of the Democratic party.
"What crime has our great President committed to warrant the abuse heaped upon him by lattices, liberals and blood-weapons? Why are many instances, misguided good Americans?"
Events caused sharp changes in the tomes of some letters. Before the Cox firing and tape disclosures, Rep. Robert L, Leggett, Calif., wrote constituent that impeachment was "a very complicated matter which will depend on evidence."
Afterwards he wrote of "one of the most ominous episodes in our political history" and that evidence available at this time strongly proves Mr. Nixon in at least a dozen foilments.
Oddly, Rep. Charles Gubser, R-Calf, wrote that he realized there was "overwhelming national sentiment favoring impeachment," a comment that is contrary to the findings of national polls. But Gubser wrote that there was no evidence for impeachment and that he would not be swept along by public opinion.
Proxmire Bill Needs Lots of Luck
" AUTHOR! AUTHOR!"
The Los Angeles Times
By ERNEST CONINE
Lots of luck, fellow. The average congressman and senator must think him a trumpet.
Sen. William Proxime, D-Wis, has come up with the shocking proposal that all spending bills carry footnotes on their front ends. How much would they cost the taxpayers.
Politicians love to tell the voters what a particular piece of legislation will do for them.
much money must be picked from the packets of the people to pay for it. Which is one reason taxes are higher than the quality of government that we get for our money.
AS PROXMIE SEES it, every bill requiring the spending of federal money should be referred upon introduction to the General Accounting Office, which would estimate the cost of the proposal over the first five fiscal years. Direct and indirect costs to state and local governments would be projected, too.
"This stark, sharp, direct reminder of
Thai Student Activists Successful in Politics
By H. D. S.GREENWAY
The Washington Post
Bangkok- The students of Thailand succeeded where others failed. The students of Greece and South Korea got thrown in jail after their countries were imprisoned. But the bloody, mid-19th-century demonstrations in Bangkok led to the overthrow of the military regime, a new civilian interim government with a promise to constitutional and democratic elections in 1974.
No sooner was the victory won, however,
no longer the Thai student movement started to
lose its cohesion. It is now badly split between those who would cooperate and assist
the students in their movement and those who
would take a more radical and activist approach to reform.
Saakens's group is called the Federation of Independent Students, Thailand (FIST). Members of the new organization are to black pajamas and to give the clenched fists a power movement and of revolutionary groups in the United States and Europe.
The main split is between the conservative leadership of the National Student Center of Thailand and the fiery activist, Saekan Prasertkul, who quit the Student Center in November to form his own organization.
The Thai student movement would be considered conservative by American and European standards. The fists might be compared to the New Left--perhaps even to the Students for Democratic Society. But even the fists are far to the right of the French students of 1968 or the American yippies and weathermen.
Published at the University of Kansas daily publication of the University's examination periods. Mail subscription rates: $8 for examination periods, $12 for attendance at lawrence. K. 60045. Student subscription rate: $5 for examination periods, $7 for attendance at lawrence. K. 60045. Student subscription rate: $5 for examination periods, $7 for attendance at lawrence. Accommodations, goods, services and employee advertisement offered to all students without regard to race or gender. The university is not necessarily those of the University of Kansas.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
KANSAN
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
NEWS STAFF
Recently, for example, the dean of architecture of Chulalongkorn University in Bangkok resigned under student pressure. The students had criticized the curriculum and insisted on capitalist-oriented, 'huge-hound and traditional' and did not allow for "creative thinking."
NEWS START
News Adviser ... Susanine Shaw
Editor
The Student Center, which claims over 100,000 members, still speaks for the majority of students here. The FISTS number only a couple of hundred so far.
News Advisor . . . Susanne Shaw
Editor
Hal Ritter
In Thai terms, activism of any stripe is new and unsettling. Although the bulk of the population was glad to see the corrupt military government go and although the students are being acclaimed as national heroes, there is nonetheless a feeling of nervousness among government officials as to what the students will do next.
As is traditional in developing countries, the students who have studied in Europe and America are usually more radical than the students who have not. The former come from a world where they were less and they are impatient to change their own old fashioned and hierarchical societies.
Hal Ritter BUSINESS STAFF
The presence of U.S. troops and bases on Thai Soil was not an issue in the October demonstrations but it is becoming one. The new Student Center deputy secretary for the university is necessary to campaign on a pledge to oppose CIA interference in Thai affairs.
Business Manager David Hunke
Anybody who watches government at close hand is inclined to agree. Yet his proposal's chances for survival are approximately the same as those of a fried snowball, now that the heat is off on congressional reform.
cost, printed right up there on page one of
your bill, could itself save billions," said
Proxmire, who is chairman of the Joint
Economic Committee.
IN MANY CASES, the shoe fits. But practical liberais know that they have a stake in government economy, too. In government spending programs are legalized, government spending special interest groups, however much they are wrapped in humanitarian rhetoric. And every dollar wasted on an unnecessary or costly program can't start that can't be spent to meet a genuine need.
People who worry about economy in government run the obvious risk of becoming social outcasts, of being labeled knee-jerk conservatives whose passion for balanced budgets far exceeds their enthusiasm for cleaning up pollution, building mass transit systems or housing for the poor, and promoting improvements in the patient's health.
Spending bills are handled by one set of committees, tax bills by another. Congressmen can and do vote for spending money without a mandate to the comfortable knowledge that the president, not they, must take the political onus for refusing to spend the money, thus saving money. Congressmen, asking for a tax increase or spending, government doesn't have, thereby adding to
If the broader public interest is consumed at all, it is almost as an afterthought.
Compounding the problem is the activist American mentality. Newspaper editorial writers and politicians commonly judge the performance of Congress by how much legislation it enacts. To quote one cynic, "Political parties don't win elections by bragging about all the bills they didn't pass."
"FINALLY, THERE IS the fact that the congressional system of handling budgets does not require the lawmakers, individually or collectively, to share the burden of choice with whoever happens to be president.
inflationary pressures on living costs.
UNDER GREAT PRESSURE from the Administration and citizens' groups, there was movement in 1973 toward a reform of the tax system. The legislature appreciated revenues, set its own overall ceiling on spending and split up the money according to its own set of priorities. Legislation toward this end passed the Senate in 1974 but seemed to clear the Senate in 1974.
Obviously, the Proxime proposal would add greatly to the effectiveness of such reform. Attractive sounding programs would bear a price tag, certified by the General Accounting Office from the time authorizing legislation was introduced. The cost of cost-versus-benefit would be far easier for the public, the press and Congress.
But this is not an idea whose time has come. In fact, the whole congressional reform movement is in danger of bogging down.
Members of Congress weren't enthusiastic about reform to begin with; they were forced toward action by public opinion. Now, thanks to Watergate, many off the hook as long as President Nixon is on it. And they are probably right.
U.S. Oil Deals Include Monumental Mistakes
Kansan Staff Reporters
By BOB SIMISON
As a conference of oil-consuming nations opened last week in Washington, for example, Libya completed the takeover of three U.S. oil companies. It had nationalized 51 per cent of its operations last September. Poland announced the takeover of the company an agreement with Libya in which U.S. guaranteed oil supplies to Poland until 1980.
Both developments were interpreted as direct retaliations to last week's conference call.
The State Department's dealings with Arab oil producers have included some petroleum companies.
The developments also indicate the utter failure of State Department moves since the September nationalization. Sen. Frank Church, D-Idaho, plans to testify about the department actions before a subcommittee of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee this week, according to the Wall Street Journal.
CHURCH'S STORY, the Journal said, will tell how State Department efforts have backfired as often as many American cars do these days. The results include higher electricity bills in New York City and a decrease from New England to Eastern Europe.
In September, it seems, the State Department and two of the three nationalized oil companies, Texaco Inc. and Standard Oil Co. of California, set out to convince other U.S. oil companies not to import Libyan oil.
Officers of the State Department and of the two companies each telephoned an officer of New England Petroleum Corp. that was working on a project to generate electricity for New York. All
The idea was to force Libya to compensate the nationalized companies and to discourage other oil-producing countries from taking similar actions.
BUT NEW ENGLAND Petroleum has already signed an agreement with the government-owned Libyan National Oil Co in response, Standard of California can contract a contract for tankers to transport the oil for New England Petroleum.
three told New England Petroleum not to buy oil from Libya.
New England Petroleum had to contract for tankers elsewhere at a rate 275 per cent higher than the rate in the canceled contract.
The increase in costs has been passed on to the power company, which is seeking to reduce its costs.
approval for a rate increase for electricity. Meanwhile, Libya was continuing to supply New England Petroleum despite the Arab oil embargo.
ANOTHER INSTANCE of backfiring by the State Department's pressure tacts occurred as a result of a warning to Coastal States Gas Corp, in Corpus Christi, Tex. Under pressure from the State Department and the oil companies, Coastal States used recoil oil from lilyba to Eastern Europe instead of bringing it to New England.
It is evident by now that Libya can sell all the oil it can produce despite an American boycott. And the response to the partial sanctions against Libya has complete nationalization of the companies.
This isn't the first time the State Department has gotten such results, Church found. In the 1960s, the State Department urged U.S. oil companies to refrain from signing agreements with Iraq because of a concessions dispute.
With a record like that, the State Department deserves little confidence in its handling of the embargo. Instead of hoping for great things out of moves for unity among ob-consuming nations, we can hope that we won't be left worse off than before.
So Iraq got help from the Soviet Union to develop concession area for sale of oil to Ecuador.
Readers Respond
To the Editor:
Students Criticize Vern's Tactics
I am a newcomer to Lawrence and the University of Kansas but I'm not wholly unfamiliar with the exploits of Atty. Gen. Rush, a professor of law who raids on our campus. The latest raid indeed follows what is by now a depressingly familiar pattern: early-morning roundup, mostly young people involved, only small children, a papuaiana and scarcely any hard drugs found.
The pattern of events is puzzling, to say the least. Is the attorney general deliberately trying to destroy the quality of evidence presented in court? Yes, witness an exodus of distinguished faculty,
We can see that, in addition to the personal hardship which those arrested must suffer, this institution will no doubt suffer for many years hence; indeed, long after Vern has passed on. I can only hope that we, as victims of this barbarism, can find the spiritual strength to bear our suffering with nobility.
a squeeze on office space and a reduction of library hours, it has become clear that the students here are paying a dear price for the Kaffarequ bureaucrat who has it in for
Paul Ceruzzi
Paul Ceruzzi
New Haven, Conn. graduate student
Griff and the Unicorn
Weed-Killing Panned
To the Editor:
Thank you for preserving the ky. Thank you for saving precious souces of food from your kitchen.
Congratulations to Valiant Vern and his Merry Midnight Marauders on their weed-killing, door-stomping extravaganza! You have saved thousands of precious little blooming buds from the cancerous, fire-eyed flames that stalk the friendly cortises of the Hill.
Congratulations for even finding weeds amongst the sacred airturf of the stadium. No longer will I have frightening nightmares about the Great Colombian stalks invading my cozy little two-bedroom garden and dragging me away from my home. The wild Widow has to experience Carlos Castaneda's separate realigning reality.
But remember this. Old wedges never live and every weed has a root. Just call this a weed expert.
Thank you for clipping the hedges of law and order so that Jpbe look like crew cuts.
And thank you, UDK, for showing me which ivy is poison. No more rashes for me. Not every Tom, Dick or Harry is a weed, you know. But Mark, Ken, Judy, Charles and the rest of the crop are. I even know the unique characteristics and particular milieu.
Gene Pinder
Gene Pinder Elk Grove. Ill. senior
Liberation 'Problem'
To the Editor:
Only for the people to whom the women's movement presents a problem could reverse liberation propagate a solution. John D. Kennedy's 1963 speech in Kansas (Kansas, Feb. 12) are full of the typical "humor" which is so frustrating to women. While pretending to understand and support women, he demeans their important work in economic innovation in economic opportunities and education.
If Bender doesn't see the need for objecting to sexist roles represented in children's books, then he couldn't understand how pervasive sexist treatment of women is in our society. Women don't have to look for sexists and girls. Bender's womanizing work provides an example patronizing way women and the women's payment "problem" is dealt with.
Michele Zimmerman
Michelle Zimmerman
Wilmington, Del. junior