Opinion
Page 4 University Daily Kansan, March 4. 1981
Easy pickin' at KU
Somehow, the last couple of months have made the University of Kansas feel as though it's not welcome in Topeka anymore.
Perhaps it feels that way because the Legislature has been using the proposed KU budget as easy pickin' for cutbacks in state expenditures. Perhaps it's because when the chairman of the state Senate Ways and Means Committee drew up a hit list of potential budget-cutting areas, every one of the major requests from the Board of Regents was on that list.
Perhaps it's because Governor Carlin recommended that KU faculty members get only 8 percent pay increases, not the 10 percent that the University had judged the very minimum for acceptable raises. And now that the Legislative committees have gotten their hands on the pay request, they've trimmed it down to 7 percent. (At this rate, by the end of the session, KU instructors will be paying the state for the privilege of working on the Hill.)
Why is KU all of a sudden the most popular place to cut the budget?
Maybe the Legislature believes the stories it's heard about KU being a seedbed for malcontents. Maybe hatchet-happy legislators, steeped in the Carry Nation Kansas tradition, have been chopping a way at that sinful seedbed of education.
Maybe the legislators find it less trouble to hack away at KU's budget rather than increase revenues by passing the proposed severance tax on gas and oil—and consequently having to face up to the tough oil and gas lobbies.
But whatever the reason, it's not difficult to project the long-term results if these budget cuts are finalized, especially those concerning the faculty pay increases. In a few years, when this Legislature's mistakes have taken effect, KU will begin losing good instructors, because even though its educational atmosphere may be alluring, its pay scales are still in the Pleistocene.
And then, no doubt, a whole new Legislature will call upon the University to explain why it allowed its once-admirable standards of education to decline so!
Politically active first ladies do more than just serve tea
Next to the president, the first lady is probably the most scrutinized, questioned, analyzed and examined person in the nation. She is expected to be knowledgeable, composed and able to face hordes of reporters vying to decipher her personality and her relationship to the president.
She, by chance of her marriage and the whim of the American people, is thrown into the
CYNTHIA
CURRIE
spotlight and the role of first lady. It is a role that no longer is merely that of a wife and hostess, but one that has expanded to include ambassador, counselor and leader.
The first woman to step out of the traditional role of first lady and into the limelight was Eleanor Roosevelt. Eleanor became the eyes and ears of her invalid husband, Franklin, traveling 40,000 miles a year while he remained in the city. She is notisted only nursery schools and hospitals to the time-honored hustles of president's wives, but stums and sharecroppers' dwellings.
Eleanor held press conferences, wrote a newspaper column that appeared in 135 newspapers and performed a radio broadcast twice a week. Her admirers said she was at the same time a mother, wife, politician, journalist and stateswoman.
She began a trend that some wives would follow. Others would not, deciding to be merely a shadow behind the figure of their husbands. First ladies that stepped out from behind that shadow were those who made the ones best remembered, and they are made of the same daring mould as Eleanor was made of.
In recent years the mold has not been broken and first ladies have taken their positions seriously and approached their opportunities with vigor. For example, Rosalyn Carter stumped for her husband, Jimmy, during his reelection campaign, often speaking before groups
who did not wholeheartedly support her husband at that time. She spoke eloquently and forcefully at her engagements, often cutting a more solid and imposing figure than her husband.
When her husband had made it into the White House in 1977, Rosalynn was scheduled to become the chairman of the White House Commission on Mental Health before she met that the president's family members were prohibited by law from being on committees.
Undaunted. she served as co-chairman.
She helped fashion a mental health bill that would improve service to the poor, racial minorities and the elderly in need of mental care—a bill which, ironically, was supported by Sen. Edward Kennedy of Massachusetts, Carnegie Democratic rival during the 1980 campaign.
Rosalymn, like Eleanor, has been criticized by the press and Congress for her candor, for the precedents she has broken, the influence she apparently wielded over the president and information she was privy to during his term. Despite the criticism and scorn, Rosalynn's example reveals that the first lady can no longer be simvolve a wife.
Nancy Reagan has a difficult act to follow. She is different than Eleanor and Rosalynn. She has always been behind her husband, Ronald, in the shadows and not in the glaring, revealing light.
Nancy may not want to be actively involved, and that is her preogative. However, when the president is unable to see through the injustices of inflation and unemployment, the first lady has the unique opportunity to alert the nation to the small injustices by giving them her attention.
So far the public has seen only the frivolous Nancy—the ex-actress who wears designer dresses and who prohibits the president from blowing out the candles on his 70th birthday cake for fear he'll get frosting on his lapels. She and the newly-elected president are said to be close, but she has expressed no desire to be actively involved in politics.
The first lady is a symbol, a representative of the country to itself and others. A first lady who plays an active role in the political process, who is a strong advocate for herself, is an asset to the president and the nation.
Letters Policy
The University Daily Kansan welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typewritten, double-spaced and not exceed 500 words. They should include the writer's name, address and telephone number. If the writer is afaraway, please include the writer's class and include the writer's class and home town or faculty or staff position. The Kansan reserves the right to edit letters for publication.
KANSAN
(SP95 66-64) Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May and Thursday June, June and July except Saturday, Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas. Kansahawaii Post Office. Send changes of address to the University Daily Kansahawaii, or six months or six years a year outside the county. Student addresses must be addressed to the university's $1 a student, passed through the student office. Postmaster: Send changes of address to the University Daily Kansahawaii, Flint Hall. The University of Kansas.
Editor
David Lewis
Managing Editor             David Lewis      Ellen Ivandola
Editorial Editor            Don Munday
Art Director               Bob Schaad
Campus Editor              Scott Fault
Associate Campus Editor     Gene Myers
Assistant Campus Editors    Ray Formanek, Susan Schoeinker
Assignment Editor         Koby Brussell
Sports Editor              Kevin Bervis
Associate Sports Editor     Tracee Hamilton
Educational Editor        Shawn McKay
Assistant Entertainment Editor Blair Lampengo
Makeup Editors           Cynthia Carrie, Patricia Wens
Writing Editor             Rene Bell Giggers
Staff Photographers       Ben Bigler, Scott Hooker, Bob Greenman Dave Bell Makeup
Business Manager Terri Fry
HARVEY
Retail Sales Manager... Larry Leibengow
National Sales Manager... Barb Light
Corporate Sales Manager... Bark Wheaton
Production Manager... Kevin Kerden
Chaunison Manager... Annette Courd
Tennessee Manager... Jim Wendel
Staff Artist... Rick Blackbird
Staff Photographer... John Hackmann
Retail Sales Representative... Juliette Beeler, Tellicie Berry, Jady Carell, Sally Cawen, Billy Groom,
Joanne Herzinger, Marcee Jacobson, Terry Knowles,
Larry Morris, Rowan Shalliman, Rob Muster
General Manager and News Advice
Kansas Admin
For Bentos 91
A new look for Lawrence?
Ohio mall has no place in Lawrence
Imagine the shock of finding a crew of workmen busily measuring your living room, apparently because some speculators on Ohio Street decided your apartment was perfect for their use. You're going to just spend a fortune improving the place, they calmly explain that this hot tub is just what you need. By now, you're getting hot under the collar. "Who do these Ohio guys think they are?" You ask. "Mercifully, before you resort to violence, you awake from this bad dream in a cold sweat."
But wait. A surprisingly similar drama is taking place right here in River City. Rather than a hot tub, it's an enclosed regional shopping mall that's on the drawing board.
Some three years ago, Jacobs, Vissoni, Jacobs, commercial developers from Cleveland, landed in Lawrence. They spent time studying the area and found Lawrence a plum ripe for the picking. They took an option to buy a 61-acre tract of land at 35th and Iowa Street, which was way for the City Commission to rezone the land from residential to commercial.
The city requested JVJ first explore other alternatives, resulting in a downtown mall concept that looked as though the spaceship from "Close Encounters of the Third Kind" had touched down in East Lawrence. This Wesco Hall-gone-mad of a building was quickly abandoned, however, bringing us up to the present.
Early last week, the Lawrence-Douglas County Planning Commission overwhelmingly recommended that JV's request for rezoning be denied. The City Commission, which has the final say, is expected to follow suit later this month. But with $300,000 already invested, the Ohio Gang has threatened legal action to overturn the city's decision. And like a good soap opera, heaven only knows how that drama will be resolved.
In exploring the issue, two basic questions about the proposed shopping mall come to
mind. First, are there alternative ways to keep Lawrence money in Lawrence without destroying downtown, and second, what role enterprise have in public planning decisions?
The first question's easy: Yes, sound alternatives do exist. A Chicago area planning firm hired by the city last spring determined that full-line department stores, such as Sears
DAVID
HENRY
or Macy's, are what the downtown needed to offset any need for a mall. They presented three different proposals where these new stores, along with office space, could be built without greatly altering downtown or wiping out surrounding neighborhoods. JVJ, however, planned to expand from major department stores to such cluster development undermines the planer's scheme.
Answering the second question is relatively simple, too. The alternative to public planning—private speculation without restraints—brought us the concrete and neon strips of Sixth and 23rd streets. Zoning laws were created to prevent, or at least, minimize, such mistakes from reoccurring. Clearly, when left on their own, developers are notorious for abandoning all concern for the community's good. Houston, with its zoning laws, it's also becoming the Los Angeles city of beauland a city where a sewer plant could easily be built next door to you.
Sometimes the long-range benefits of a development offset people's noisy protests and the city has no choice but to displace residents who live nearby. And the mayor is rezoning argue that the mail will bring additional revenue to the city, county and state. Admittedly true, but at what cost to businesses throughout the city, especially those downtown?
And while discussing the economic practicality of shopping malls, consider the question of energy efficiency. In the next twenty years, energy costs will undoubtedly soar, particularly for utilities. Heating and cooling a 450,000 square-foot beached whale in New York will cost about $1 million, particularly when the cost is passed along to the consumer in the form of higher prices.
Lawrence's response to the proposal was loud and clear: people simply don't want it. Many are loyal to a newly revitalized downtown and fear the mall would destroy the area. Others view the massive build-up of southwest Lawrence as unnecessary. Whatever the reason, clearly, there is solid evidence supporting their opinions.
Therefore, when Jacobs, Visconsi, Jacobs hints at going to court, I'm reminded of the kid who threatens to take his ball back if he doesn't get his way. My guess is that JVJ's main concern isn't for the betterment of downtown or the community. Rather, I suspect these people are really upset because there's a handsome profit to be made. Otherwise, they'd have left here long ago.
Downtown merchants, neighborhood associations and concerned citizens have joined together in opposing an enclosed regional shopping mall. I'm confident the City Commission will follow the planning commission's guidelines against rezoning. Certainly, their approval of JVJ request would make a mockery of representative government.
Nevertheless, denying the request probably only wins the battle and not the war. If the issue does go to court, we can only hope that Lawrence wins the right to continue planning its own future development. Anything less would be a nightmare.
Letters to the Editor
Washburn valuable to more than Topeka
To the editor:
Cynthia Currie in her column in the Feb. 25 issue states that Washburn University should be allowed to suffer "a slow, painful death." One would have hoped that a college student would have had more of an appreciation of her education than to have written such a column.
Where did Currie get the facts to arrive at the conclusion? True, Washburn is only a small liberal arts college, but it is hardly a clone of Pittsburgh State University or Fort Hays State University. Its location in the capital of Kansas provides students with many unique opportunities, such as observing the state Legislature in session.
As for her assertion that the law school at KU is superior to the one at Washburn, it also can be discarded as being without basis in fact. Law faculty at Washburn must have a high quality of the faculty at Washburn's law school equals that of the respected faculty at KU. In fact, a higher percentage of Washburn law school graduates pass the bar exam on the first attempt than those of faculty staff (it is far superior, but reputations do not teach.
Finally, Currie discovers that supporting Washburn would be "bad business" for the state. This is undeniably true, but is it "good business" for the state to pour nearly $3 billion into the existing six Regents schools? Of course it isn't. Education has never been a good business. It is, however, an institution upon which this country has placed its all its hopes. The death of any university should be avoided whenever possible, not applauded. Chris Cobler
Topeka junior
Review unjustified
To the editor:
True! Some plays at the University Theatre are less equal than others, but one wonders if it has occurred to Paul Lim that some critics are less equal than others? This occurred to me after reading "Gerardina Alba"; what an example of objective criticism describing the daughter of a Spanish matriarch as "a foreshored Charo." However, after his review of "The Admirable Crimson," ineptitude did more than just occur to me; it leapt out and grabbed me by the . . . throat.
The first half of his review is quite complimentary (to the script) and I agree wholeheartedly. When he states that "the only things worth recommending were the colorful costumes, the smudgy (?) makeup, the whimsical lighting and the fanciful set," it makes me wonder whether he and I saw the same production.
As far as you review of "Bernarda Alba",
quit effort, go to a "wetty fellow." And your
I am an actor, and, until the cast list was posted, was in competition with LeWan for the part of Crichton. I must admit, I probably viewed his performance with a far more discerning eye than most theatregoers would. And I was impressed. Lim, without realizing it, said to me: "He head; LeWan's Crichton was stuff, which is precious." He made most appropriate word a person could use to describe that period of Victorian England—stiff, starched and stuffy.
M
The decree the c suppe
Clin had no to mo
"At said, have fatali have
mittee Clinto Medio decree
Am
was !
who s
when
Frida
review of Crichton? Well, most of the 1,500 people who saw it would agree with me, you see.
Overland Park freshman
"I ciden Bran not th if the Bree
To the editor:
Real war is no game
Although we have learned to accept infantile behavior by various groups in the KU community, the McCollum "frat" warfare games represent a new frontier in the annals of campus childishness. Although wrapping someone's house or car in toilet paper might be considered funny, making a mockery of the American combat soldier is immature and disgraceful.
To explain the irreversibility of their actions in terms these beer-guzzling bumbos would understand is a task I'm not sure I could handle. Just let them ask any American who has defended the country in wartime. They are likely to find out that combat is not fun and games. A visit to any Veterans Hospital would open their eyes to the understanding that jeopardizing our military industry in change for national freedom is not a joking matter. I suspect that the thousands of brave men and women buried in our national cemeteries would not want their supreme sacrifice taken in a humorous vein. When they did, they didn't recover by drinking a few beers.
So come on, fellas. Why don't you go cram
yourselves into a phone booth?
Dave Jampolsky Lawrence sophomore
---
---