4
Tuesday, April 27, 1971
University Daily Kansan
KANSAN comment No on the Referendum
Vote no.
Today's referendum is an ill-timed, ill-encoded act to solve a problem originally made trouble.
Last year students were called to help fund Wescoe Hall and the new hospital. This year it's to "help pay faculty salaries."
The precedent must stop here.
The president must step here. There is no guarantee that the money would ever actually reach faculty members.
The freed money could be used to pay the salary of the adviser to the Jayhawker Yearbook, for instance, or to a secretary in the student aids of college. The funds can also be used after some financial juggling, pay traffic and security personnel.
this money, earmarked for faculty salaries can be used to fund raises for the coach each season.
Clearly, this is not the intent of the proposal.
Andlause for the senate's action has
The faculty have remained strangely silent on the proposal.
been loud. The Chancellor, state legislators, the governor and the student body president have all endorsed the responsibility of the student body."
Perhaps they recognize the possibility of lasting damage the proposal bodies.
Students funding of University salaries or buildings if established by this proposal could lead the University to times far more dangerous than these.
We share the anger and frustration of many faculty members—but this is not a solution.
The intent of the senate is admirable but the mechanics and insidious prospect the proposal suggests makes it a treacherous piece of sentiment.
More importantly, this proposal if passed could move the University to financial catastrophe faced after finally than it can afford to gamble.
—Tom Slaughter
Referendum Support Ignores Facts and Logic
There are three main arguments support strong source allocation, and all require strong source allocation.
A titer circulating campus is a good example of the misinformation and wrong conclusions being made about the referendum proposal.
"—Vote yes to help maintain University programs," the flyer says. But no one, not even Chancellor Chalmers, knows what programs will be "maintained." The allocation may even be used for activities that students are not told about. In addition, many worthwhile student programs will lose money, or even face elimination, because of the Senate's "gift to the University."
"—Vote yes to relieve the pressure for decreased faculty salaries," the flyer continues. Chancellor Chalmers, other administrators and Student Senate members have all said the money will not raise salaries above this year's level. The Chancellor said Sunday that some of the money would not be restored, so that teaching assistants can get a raise above this year's salary. But, again, no one knows where exactly the money will be used. But the money certainly won't significantly affect the
paychecks of tenured faculty members
paychecks or tenured faculty members." — "Vote yes to build more unified University and state support for increased legislative funding," the flyer concludes. This point is the most misleading and dangerous of all. The president of the Kansas House, the president of Emory State, the editor of the Lawrence Journal-World, and many other prominent persons in the state have said the Senate's action may convince legislators to DECREASE state funding for higher education. Last year the students assumed the financial burden for the new student health center when the legislature balked. Now the students are being asked to use their money to pay for unspecified services and activities formally funded by the state.
This is the second year the Student Senate has said it is glad to foot the bill for something if the Legislature isn't. When will this trend stop? The legislators may decide that if the students are willing to pay $130,000, maybe they should pay $200,000 next year, or $500,000, or more.
A yes vote today could be the cue for the legislature to start giving the students more responsibility in financing the University's operation.
And we certainly don't want that. Vote no.
Griffith and the Judge
By Frank Slover Kansan Writer
At last the government is back on the track. After a legislative session torn by partisan dissension, our public officials seem to be realizing that their internecine quarrels are pointless and are returning to a policy of cooperation.
We are referring, of course, to last week's ruling by Judge Reece Robrahan which declared certain statutes unconstitutional. It occurred in the case of Regent Thomas J. Griffith who appeared before the court to answer questions about his students of the University that he had not listed all his financial holdings in the disclosure statement required of all state officials by Kansas law.
Judge Robrahan is to be commended. First, it isn't every day that a county judge uncensures law laws unconstitutional; most are so time-sensitive they leave that sort of decision to a higher
court. Second, our public officials should not have their altruism and purity of motivation soiled with a demand that they open their private finances to the scrutiny of those they serve so selflessly. Third, the judge did not declare disclosure laws themselves unconstitutional, only the clauses under which the defendant was charged; this means that if someone lacking Regent Griffith's pristine character should break the same law, he could receive the punishment he deserves.
It must be nice for the public servants across the state to know that they can now accomplish their jobs without the harassment of useless laws which assume the possibility of corruption in the uncorruptible. As for Judge Robrahan, it must be nice for him to know that if he ever gets into a jam, Regent Griffith will probably be there to give him a hand.
Puf Bailey Not Assistant
Raymond L. "Puf" Bailey, who proposed the allocation of funds to the University by the Student Senate, was said to be a teaching assistant in Monday's editorial.
He is not a teaching assistant,
although he does teach a LAS
course. Records in the Business
office list him with teaching
assistants, although he is not
a teaching assistant as such.
$130,000 of your money is at stake today. Know what you're voting on.
To the editor.
The Legislature Is Responsible
As a concerned student, I must vote NO on today's Referendum pertaining to the allocation of student fee.
Several Sides to the Referendum
The Governor and the State Legislature have failed to perform their obligation toward higher education by not meeting the standards of universities and colleges. Some of our Student Senators have erroneously transferred this responsibility to our shoulders by making a question of how much money we are paying 30 per cent of the general operation budget when the Board of Regens have made it a policy that students of state schools receive full funding for the budget. This could be an indication of further transference of financial responsibility to the students when in reality the funding responsibility of all of Kansas.
LETTERS
This is not a question of loyalty but a question of making our business more efficient and carry out their monetary duties toward higher education. If the quality of education in state universities is lacking or lack of funds, I will not accept the responsibility, but place it with the Governor and Legislature.—the Governor and Legislature.
I ask that you consider this side of the question before casting your vote.
Senate Allocation To Help KU
William C. Jacoby Lawrence graduate student
Failure of the state legislature to reinstate funds deleted from the University of Kansas budget poses a grave problem for us as we spend all of our $130,148 in operating funds than we had in the previous year.
The decrease in funds will cut proportionally across the university where reductions will have to be made in salaries, wages, university programs, and faculty positions. The problems are easily seen where programs are sacrificed and faculty are lost.
While a student senate ap-
priation to the university will
allow students to face problems we face, the benefits of
the student senate action to
allocate $301.148 to the university
will be greater than the 1971-72 deficit could be great;
—The university would not have to make some of the proposed cuts,
To the editor:
The reaction throughout Kansas would be extremely positive as the state sees students succeed in college, and it helps to help the university in trouble.
-Students would benefit directly from the use of fees by the alleviation of cuts in all departments.
The university community of students, faculty, and administration would draw closer sharing this common problem.
Opponents to the senate action argue that the monies used might set a precedent that the senate would increase tuition and fees for students. The state legislature has the primary responsibility for funding higher education. It must also ensure that duty. It must be understood that this student action comes only because of the extreme circumstances of the KU program, which action is taken out of concern for the university at the expense of our own student activities. Any allocation of student funds to the university is accompanied by a state-wide effort this summer and next year by students, faculty, administration, and citizens to press for more legislature support for higher education.
We must also be concerned about the detrimental effect on student organizations when students activities budget is allocated to the university. Cuts would have to be made from almost all annual activities share in the university's "year of austerity." Hopefully, our student senators will be able to prioritize their priorities so that no worthwhile student programs are strangled.
A vote in favor of the reauthorization of the rules should be interpreted as a student stamp of approval on our university. KU has a long way to go in meeting the needs of students of the 785 school district, and thus construed as an endorsement of what we are taught or who we are teaching whether student money flow into university coffers will in any way improve teaching methods or bring more professors into the university.
—Faculty presently at KU might feel more inclined to stay here.
We'll be wasting our money if we pass the budget referendum and then we expect proof of university acceptance the state to make needed increases needed funding. We must follow our monetary investment with a commitment to build a sound educational program at KU.
Miller Says Vote Yes
On balance we see a favorable vote for the referendum as a chance to greatly help our university in building a new
I am writing you today to encourage your participation in the Student Body referendum this Tuesday, April 27. The proposal to provide $130,148 in student activity fees for the University operations is one that demands your attention.
To the members of the Student Body:
In my opinion, you should vote in favor of this proposal. This year the Kansas State Legislature deleted nearly one million dollars from the Governor's "nunsere" budget for KU. This cut will make the state appropriation for KU for fiscal 1972, 1930, 148 less than fiscal 1971 (this
Although technical objections have been raised regarding this action, there is no question that these funds can be used by the Chan- tion.
It is true that this action will reduce allocations to student activities. But the question of priorities is most important. I believe there is no need for me to make a decision.
Although the loss of $130,148 from a 44 million dollar budget would not destroy the foundation of this great University, you should know the loss of these funds will (1) increase class sizes, (2) reduce student enrollment, (3) increase the number of faculty filled, (4) decrease student-faculty ratio and contact, and, therefore, (5) hurt over all academic quality. Moreover, approval of this action clearly shows that students feel their University and its faculty are
Griff & the Unicorn
I encourage you to vote YES. It is your opportunity to participate in demonstrating your unselfish support for this University and tell KU students that you are a great supporter.
David G. Miller President of the Student Body
By Sokoloff
We encourage student support for Tuesday's budget referendum.
Not Responsibility Of Senate
attitude toward higher education both within and without the university community, Granted, action of this nature is a value judgment, but it is our feeling that such support as our first priority.
Kathy Hoefer
Prairie Village senior
Jeffrey Lefebvre
Prairie Village 1st year Law
John Mize
Salina junior
Dave Steen
Ficat senior
Marti Stewart
Vancouver, British Columbia
graduate
Mary Ward
Leeward lionel
"Copyright 1971, David Sokoloff."
To the editor:
The recent action of the Student Senate of the University of Kansas which seeks to donate money for the Chicago School for the use of the University again demonstrates the quality of modern day students. The Senate has also increased faculty salaries. This act is a generous gesture which concretely underlines their commitment to their belief in higher education. It is a responsible move in the face of an irresponsible act of the legislature. We hope that the Senate will live up to their expectations.
However, it is, in our opinion, outside the scope of student responsibility to provide salaries that are properly and duty properly reserved for the state. It is a sad fact that the legislature has not seen fit to meet the needs of higher education, one of which involves faculty salaries. But this is not unreasonable. The state as a consequence of the legislature's inaction (welfare, sewage treatment, pollution control, highways, etc.). Nevertheless, it is insulting and demeaning not to be offered a raise in view of indemnities or an inherent worth of this faculty.
The state now pays much less than half the cost of the University of Kansas and now
students feel they are obliged to fulfill the state's obligations. Students are now being assessed on some of these duties. Wescoe Hall—and have been subsidizing the Athletic Corporation some time. Both students and staff should if the state cannot meet its responsibilities. This year, our teachers will meet their responsibilities or can be made available, the legislature has demonstrated that it will not meet its response. However, we point out the game of politics with the future, no matter what the consequences. However, we point out that students acted responsibly but were simply overwhelmed by the nay sayers. Since he should not shoulder further burdens that are properly
the state's, we will not accept a raise if these student maines are involved. Instead we suggest that the faculty should be by the use of Student Senate money, that money be given to the faculty in Lawrence—Headquarters and the Ballard Center. Alter-ment of the money could be given as a fee to legislature to attempt to raise the quality of that August body. We hope our suggestion, of course, of the Ballard Center, finds favor with the rest of the faculty. If there is no such agreement given under these circumstances.
B. R, Burchill, Physiol. & Cell Biol.
L. L. Houston, Biochemist
An All-American college newspaper
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newsroom-UN 4-4810
Business Office-UN 4-4358
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription rates $5 a semester, $10 per month. Students are encouraged to purchase goods, services and employment offered offered to all students without regard to color, creed or national origin. Opinions expressed are not necessarily representative of the university.
NEWS STAFF News Adviser . . . Del Brinkman
Editor
 Assistant Editor
Campus Editor
News Editors
News Editor
Chief Coach
Sports Editor
Review Editor
Makeup Editor
Assistant Editor
 assistant News Editors
Robin Galeen
Robert Bannan
Evans Dawns
Ted Illiff, Duke Lambert, Tom Slaughter, Nila Walker
Dave Bartel, Mellon Braser
Dan Baker
Mike Moffet, Craig Porter
Kurtis Griff, Jeff Goodle
Jim Forbes, Jim Forbes
BUSINESS STAFF Business Advisor . . . Mel Adams
Business Manager
Assistant Business Manager
Assistant Business Manager
Assistant Business Manager
National Advertising Manager
Chartering Business Manager
Circulation Manager
Management Producers
REPRESENTED FOR NATIONAL ADVERTISING BY
National Educational Advertising Services
A DIVISION OF
READERS' INSTITUTE SERVICES, INC.
360 Laskington Ave., New York, N.Y. 10017
TM @ All rights reserved 1921 THE MILWAUKEE JOURNAL BOOK
BINDING LABEL Sindicate
50 Years Ago Today—1921
Those Were the Days
George "Pots" Clark was returning to Kansas University as head football coach. He was the unanimous choice of the student-faculty athletic board who hired him. His return gave University into the evolution of its University into one of the big schools of the country."
It was announced by Jim Austin, Kansan editor, that the annual dance of the Journalism Department "Journalism Austin" is being held by Jim Austin. The students of KU do not have time to dance."
30 Years Ago Today—1941
Greg Rice, whom the army refused for military duty as physically unfit, set a 6:41.3 mark in the first special mile-and-a half ever run at the Drake relay.
Seventeen members of the KU equitation classes returned to Lawrence after riding on a course in New York.
invitation from Chancellor Deane Mallet to Gov. Payne Rattner to attend the university's 75 anniversary celebration in June. The troop followed Army tactics on the trip, alternating between walking and trotting. On the way by a highway patrol escort was five m.p.h.
It was dandelion day in the city of Lawrence. Tickets to the Granada Theater were awarded to the boys and girls below high school age who deliver the most dandelions to the theater. A one and one-half ton truck was completely filled.
20 Years Ago Today—1951
Sen. Paul Douglas (D-Dll) "It will be as
miracle that can avoid a third world war and
military conflict," he said.
six members of the 1947 KU Orange Bowl football team signed up for the Variegation game to be held in Memorial Stadium May 5, I. V. Sikes head football coach announced.