4
Thursday. March 30,1972
University Daily Kansan
Garry Wills
KANSAN comment
Editorials, columns and letters published on this page reflect only the opinions of the writers.
Rights Bill Passed
The United States Senate passed the Equal Rights Amendment last week. It has taken almost 50 years to get the amendment through both the House and the Senate so it is obvious why groups concerned about the rights of women were so elated with its passage.
Some of the opponents to the amendment had argued that it was unnecessary because the 14th Amendment states "no state shall make or enforce any law which shall abridge the rights of citizens of the United States . . nor deny to any person the equal protection of the laws."
If that amendment offered real protection to women there would not be states with laws limiting a woman's right to handle property and start businesses. State colleges and universities would not have discriminatory-adjunctives against women students and employees differently than the men involved with those institutions. Surely, there would not be states with laws proscribing more severe punishments for women who commit criminal actions than for men. If that amendment had any relevance to women, it would have been able to vote then instead of having to wait until 1920 for the 19th amendment which gave women the right to vote. Since voting is one of privileges of citizenship and since women have not received equal protection under the law, either the 14th Amendment has been seriously violated or the law allows women to vote or citizens. Neither is a particularly pleasant explanation but I hope it is the former.
It is also hard to understand the Supreme
Court's reluctance to hear cases dealing with sex discrimination if women were to be considered as having the same protection enjoined on all men was not until November of 1771 that the Supreme Court used the "equal protection" clause of that amendment to ban arbitrary sex discrimination. For too long the only court that had jurisdiction on women by the Constitution was that of voting.
The Kansas House and Senate ratified the amendment Wednesday after snuckering, bible quoting and facetious arguing. It was trying and somewhat degrading as a woman to listen to some of the comments made on the floor.
Hopefully all that will be in the past soon and women will be able to enjoy all of the rights they deserve, including pay sponsibilities. Now it is up to the state legislatures to ratify the 27th Amendment which guarantees "Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged by the United States."
It was embarrassing as a Kansas to have to acknowledge how foolish and uninformed much of the discussion by my state legislators was. One of the representatives was not even sure the United States Senate had passed the amendment. At any rate, they did pass it and I am happy and thankful that. The other amendment but I hope they will move a little faster. More than a half a century is a long time to wait.
—Mary Ward
Readers Respond
Mann; Hamlet; Women...
Herbie
To the Editor:
After reading the reviews of the Herbie Mann concert and the Little Symphony concert in the March 9 issue of the paper, I really question what qualification the reviewers have for their jobs.
The Mann concert was reviewed by John Fischer. To begin with, the headline of his article incorrectly implied that the performer must be on stage. Fischer then states Mann has lost his artistry by changing to a more commercial arrangement of pop-rock pieces. Although it is true that Mann's style has changed, it is still possi- tively been bored or unattended when using a style chart, already familiar to them. As to the arrangements, it is the progression of an arranger to ar- rangees chosen. The beauty of music is its infinite possibilities of variety. Fischer also stated that Mann received some obscene cata- lities or shouts of approval. The performer, carefully, he would have heard that the shouts were either requests or shouts of approval. The performer re-ected at another person in the balcony, not at the performers. I felt that the program was very appropriate for a cocktail lounge, as Fischer suggests. I doubt that many cocktail lounge crowds can be represented by sounds of the group, much less even recognize most of the songs.
The Little Symphony concert was reviewed by Pat Moore and the rest of us, unbelievable in this review we were the statement that the Mozart flawless presentation. "I would think that a reviewer would be more careful in his choice of instrument than his ignorance. In the field of music it is impossible to have "flawless" performance by humans
Jackie Zastera Omaha Senior
Sisters
To the Editor:
This is an unofficial report of the temporary emergency daycare committee of the February Sisters, subtitled WE WAS SHAFTED.
To say I am discouraged is not true. To say I am angry, weary, bruised and bitter is true.
I've looked into the eyes of Senex, Studex, Auditing and Finance, and Student Senate. I've spent hours planning, talking, asking questions about my sisters weary and fall away from eight to two to just me. I've heard the sympathetic often patronizing voices say, "Yes, we always add," but you don't please us, we don't please to help you."
The logic of the idea, the magnitude and emotion of the need, these were not the relevancies. We had different plane. "Do you know the laws, do you know the people? Aha, you haven't worked on this project yet." My work is done on a noisy teletype, eight hours a day at the library. My college education requires me to take a forake house pay of $331 a month. And when I get home, I cook and clean and sew and iron and mostly care for two beautiful children. In addition, I work another job, planning a day care center. It's a full time job, planning a child care center. You have to work in the house and children. It is truly my job to take on three full time jobs! Is that what the men who are the frontmind of the women who need have?
It is so strange that bitterness is my reaction to the professor she messes me he is underpaid? I've seen it in school and it hard to understand my weariness as I put my children to bed and explainaining again that dad yelled at me when there isn't money to pay allowance this week? Is it really old and old-grown? Are giant accusations that I am unprepared, don't care how your children are cared for? Is it unrealized that the child care center is bureaucratically shoved under the rug (off to a committee of experts) by the teacher in my low salary (keeps训下 down, you know), an interest in not finding the answers them- way, now on to the important work).
I've met so many men who can't understand, don't see why in the world women are angry with men because why they feel they must move.
you, mister, I'm merely trying to survive in a world not designed for me.
I'm not playing games with
Christine Leonard Library staff
Reviews
To the Editor:
I am curious about Marilyn King's knowledge of the theater. I do not profess to have an abun-titude with acting, but can tell a poor performance when I see one. Miss Kimg remarked in her review of "Rosencranz and his friend," in which she chael Kemmerling 'handed G' emergence as the true protagonist of the play with superb subtle flair, but without the opening night show. Kemmerling's performance was shallow and lacked any understanding of the audience, training. Indeed it was an improvement over the previous night's performance in Hamlet, but it was void of feeling for the part.
The play was full of mistakes from the beginning, yet apparently Miss King chose not to attend her evening in the lobby since she failed to mention any of these tickets she said the show would start at 8:00 p.m., but instead it started at 8:00 p.m. Then as it began with Kemmerling pulled Patinkin on the platform during the curtain call for no apparent reason. It is unclear why the reviewer failed to notice it.
The body of the play was full of light misques and sound misques and set difficulties. Yet the play had a lot of any of these blunders. The biggest mistake of the play went unnoticed to Miss King. At the end of the play, a man is to announce that the performance was applauding at the time yet he went right ahead and said his line. That guy could have come over from the local junior-high to deliver that line so badly.
The play reeked of non-professionalism yet Miss Kring failed to notice it. I suggest that Miss Kring have her eyes examined and the ears before she attempts to hear her before another University production.
John J. Welsh Wichita junior
The Establishment Bundys
The Establishment protects its own. The great recent proof of this was William Burdy's appointment as editor of the most prestigious magazine in the area of international policy, Foreign Affairs.
At the time of his appointment, last summer, there were critics within the magazine's sponsoring organization, the Council on Foreign Relations. How they asked, could Bundy preface over these mistakes, could he make mistakes when he had helped make those mistakes, as a member of the Johnson administration?
The Establishment pack was off and howling, with charges of a "new McCarthyism." McCarthyism has always meant, for men, attacks on members of the club—they are not nearly as quick to spot the danger the non-members are concerned (e.g., the harassment of the Berrigans).
Good old reliable Arthur Schlesinger got into print against Bundy's critics as 'self-appointed keepers of the morality
of others" Kenneth Galbrath was "revolted at the idea of trying to deny somebody a job." (It be revolted, right? It be denied, richer Richard Kleinstein a job?)
Well, Bundy's critics have been vicious, by the biring of The Foreign Affairs books editor, John Stossinger. This was done by retiring editor, Hamilton Fish Armstrong, so Bundy would not have the onus of performing the task when he takes over; but Armstrong let it be known that he was doing Bundy's request (as, indeed, he would have to, during this lane duck period).
What was Stoessinger's offense? He was told that he did not distribute words of praise evenly on all sides of an issue—an odd requirement for a book editor. Must he praise the devil each time he lets slip a good word for God?
The cryptic reference to his offense is clarified by a letter Stoesinger got before the one from Armstrong. This came from William Bundy's brother, who just happens to be an Establishment figure even more formidable, and whose first complaint was than brother Bill -from McGeorge -"Mac" issued the first warning on high that Mr. Stoesinger was not being equitable on Vietnam.
Actually, in the issue Bundy referred to, the reviews had been restrained and far from "onsedited." One said Johnson's The Vantage Point" seeks to juxtapose.
tify, not analyze." The Pentagon Papers were called "a Greek tragedy in four acts." An incisive criticism of the Bundy apparatus was rejected because of "exaggeration and overstatement." True, one review agreed that President Johnson had misled the people on those attacks in the Turkish Kokun but—that it was the administration, including some members of Johnson's own administration, have reached.
That McGeorge Bundy felt this sample of reviews too biased, that he intervened in person, that his brother William did even more, and that Hanif was along with this—nine of these studies on our surprise studies of the our Establishment
It is clear that the brothers Bundy mean to protect their careers from the kind of analysis now centering on Vietnamese that brother William's editorial job is to create a new, this defensive enterprise. Mr. Snoesinger was just one victim of the process. There will probably be others. After all, we can't let "the new McCarthyism" deprive men of jobs, can we? "me" in that sentence, the Establishment's author. It is the Establishment's task to make the world safe for the Bundy.
Which leaves to other students of foreign affairs the real task of the future—to make the world safe from the Bundys.
Copyright, 1972, Universal Press Syndicate
James J. Kilpatrick
Nader's Dreams Worry Some
WASHINGTON - A Senate subcommittee has been busy, busy, busy this month, marking up a final version of the super snopper bill. Before long we will know exactly what senators Javits of New York and Hugh McCarthy are proposing in the way of new consumer legislation.
The general features of their little monster already are well known to professionals in the field. After all, this is the third
year of the war. The two liberals have it in mind to welt together the strongest elements of their own 1970 bill with the strongest elements of the House Bill approved last October. In this election year they will envision a final product of irresistible appeal.
All this calculated to bring a smile to the dour face of Ralphie's gentleman's ideal is to create a sense of authenticity in an agency Agency with more teeth than
a barracuda, and to let the creature swim at will among the many government offices now under his control is an eye on consumer interest.
The country needs such an outfit about as urgently as Florida needs an April freeze.
Consider a few specifics of S.1177, the Javits-Riboff bill. Among other things, the bill would empower the director of the CPA to intervene in any 'matter or proceeding' that in management "substantially affects the interest of consumers."
The wording is important. In the bureaucratic lexicon, a "proceeding" implies a formal hearing or investigation conducted with all the safeguards of the Ad Hoc Council. It also requires the authority of a new consumer agency were limited to intervention in such a proceeding at least the ground rules would be clearer. But what is "a matter"? It could be anything. And in this day, the challenge of government is involved in decisions that "substantially affect" the consumer.
The Senate proposal would make the new agency the master of all them. The proposed CPA could demand that the food and drug administration, for example, initiate a proceeding against all manufacturers of cough syrup. If the FDA declined, it could be used as a childhood made to stand in the center "to make public in a current and concise statement its reasons therefore."
Even the President of the United States would be ordered around. The FDA's hypothetical refusal to initiate a cough syrup proceeding could be appealed to the President, "who shall by order published in the Federal Register decide whether the proceeding shall be commenced "
When these same sweeping provisions were proposed to the House last fall, Florida's congressman Don Fuqua made a recommendation that might "substantially" affect the consumer. He found no fewer than 30 agencies, ranging alphabetically from the Atomic Energy Commission to the Tennessee Valley Authority whose responsibilities subject to the oversight of the Consumer Protection Agency.
The prospect is grim for both government and industry. In order to justify its existence, the CPA would be compelled to dispatch hordes of zealous investigators to confront intervention. in a paper blizzard, orderly regulation and business freedom alike would be lost. In the end, the overprotected consumer, the object of all this solicitude, would be gasping in a cotton wollcoon. Perhaps that would be necessary that gentleman's dreams, alas, are other men's nightmares.
"Commended."
"The new Consul agency would have the authority "as a matter of right" to leap into any court action based upon final action by a federal agency—so long as the director of the CPA is involved. It is likely to have a substantial adverse effect upon the interest of consumers." The language is too broad. It would reduce old-line knowledge of the government to hollow shells, drained of effective power.
Griff and the Unicorn
Copyright, 1972 The Washington Star Syndicate. Inc.
Letters to the editor should be typewritten, double-aged and should not exceed 100 words. All letters are subject to editing and condensation, so please send them to the Editor's Desk. Please provide their name, year in school and home town; faculty and staff must provide their name and position; others must provide their name and address.
Letters Policy
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
KANSAN
america's Pacmaking college newspaper
America's Pacemaking college newspaper
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year several buildings and facilities are closed. Students should inform their faculty if they wish to attend all classes without regard to class, or attend additional classes if expressed interest. Please contact your faculty directly if you have any questions regarding the policies.
By Sokoloff
"Copyright 1972, David Sokoloff."
NEWS STAFF
News Adviser...Del Brinkman
Editor
Associate Editor
Campaign Editor
News Editor
Cog Chip
Sports Editor
Campaign Editors
Sports Editor
Assistant Sports Editor
Feature Editor
Editorial Editor
Wire Editors
Marketing Editor
Review Editor
Office Manager
Chip Crowns
Scott Speaker
Ria Haugh, Eric Kramer
Joyce Greenwood, Ron King
Aiden Anderson, Bon King
Bob Simmon
Brian Smitsch
Bernie Sternick
Tom Stanglack
Tom Stanglack
Jayme Jordan
Harlan Neidhardt
Phillip Bray
Greg Sorber
Tomas Rusk
BUSINESS STAFF
Business Manager
Associate Advertising Manager
Advertising Manager
National Advertising Manager
National Advertising Manager
Promotional Advertising Manager
Dave Murtrave
David Murtrave
Member Associated Collegiate Press
REPRESENTED FOR NATIONAL ADVERTISING BY
National Educational Advertising Services
A DIVISION OF
READERS DISTRICT ELECTRIC SERVICES, INC.
360 Locking Ave., New York, N.Y. 10017