University Daily Kansan, February 6, 1985
OPINION
Page 4
The University Daily KANSAN
Published since 1889 by students of the University of Kansas
The University Daily Kansan (USPK 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Staffer Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kanun 6044, daily during the regular school year and Wednesday and Friday during the summer session, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holiday and trials periods. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kanun 6044 Subscriptions by mail are for six months or两年. Third class postage paid at Lawrence, Kanun 6044 Subscriptions are $1 and are paid through the student activity fee PASTMaker. Send address changes to the University Daily Kansan, 118 Staffer Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kanun 6044
MATT DEGALAN Editor
DIANE LUBER SUSAN WORTMAN Managing Editor Editorial Editor
ROB KARWATH Campus Editor
LYNNE STARK Business Manager
DUNCAN CALHOUN MARY BERNICA
Retail Sales National Sales
Manager Manager
SUSANNE SHAW General Manager and News Adviser
DAVID NIXON Campus Sales Manager
JOHN OBERZAN Sales and Marketing Adviser
Future of GSLs
Today, the Reagan administration will supposedly ask Congress to reduce the size of the federal Guaranteed Student Loan program. The details have yet to be announced, but the proposal may call for students from families with incomes of $32,500 or more to be denied aid.
The administration also wants to limit financial aid to qualified students to $4,000 a year.
This prompts several observations and questions. First, what are the cuts making room for? The student loan program is essentially an investment in America's future. But money cut from it can be reinvested to meet other needs and promote prosperity.
Second, do the proposals provide enough flexibility to meet the needs of students in different circumstances? A four-child family with an income of $33,000 a year would suffer a greater burden than a single-child family earning the same income if the upper income brackets are not appropriately graduated.
And students who have been forced to carry heavier class loads in some semesters, a result of previous budget cuts, do not have the same opportunities to work part-time as those with lighter loads.
There has been much talk of late of the "safety net" concept. Many poor and otherwise needy people deserve government loans. It is in America's interest to see that money is available for them.
But there is no doubt that much fat still remains, and it should be cut. A student earning $5,000 a year, coming from a family with an income of $45,000 a year, does not need to be subsidized by the government.
KU goes to Siberia
It evidently was intended only as a joke when someone suggested that the University of Kansas be renamed as KUS University of Kansas at Siberia.
A person who can tell that kind of joke in this kind of weather surely is cold-blooded.
Yet when the thermometer seems stuck at zero, and when snow has been on the ground since 1984, it is all too easy to see only the negative aspects of winter. Certainly cold weather carries serious implications. A car that fails to start can make the driver late for classes or work, and students walking up the Hill against the north wind must bundle up well.
Moreover, icy sidewalks and streets pose dangers, and those who have warm food and shelter need to help those who do not.
Cold weather, however, does have some positive aspects. After a walk through the winter wonderland, nothing tastes better than a fresh cup of hot chocolate. What normally is a routine event — starting the car — can be a cause for joyous celebration. All those sweaters received as gifts at Christmas will not just sit on the top shelf of the closet.
Each day is a new adventure in temperature — will the high be, with any luck, 20 degrees? Those hardy souls for whom walking to and from classes was not enough exposure to the elements can enjoy a study break that is exclusively winter's; traveying down a snow-and ice-covered hill.
Regards should be sent to San Antonio and other parts of Texas that have experienced an unusually chilly winter. Stocking caps should be tipped to the people of the northlands, whose weather — including wind chills of 70 degrees below zero — should serve to console Kansans.
And let us appreciate the green grass and blooming flowers of spring, when it arrives at long last.
A problem blown out of proportion
A bill proposed to the Missouri General Assembly in December by Rep. Fred Williams, D-St. Louis, would make it illegal for anyone to blow his nose in a "loud, obnoxious or offensive manner" while in a restaurant with patrons present.
House Bill 271 is before the Public Health and Safety Committee. Although Williams may feel strongly about this "issue," the bill brings the following scene to mind.
A police officer approaches a restaurant patron who has been over-blowing his nose.
"All right, buddy. That's enough," the officer says."
The patron, we'll call him Joe Blow, looks surprised.
"I can't help it. I've got a cold."
"That doesn't matter. I've had enough of this hanky-panky."
"What's the problem, officer?" "You're ruining everybody's meal with your loud, obnoxious or offensive nose-blowing."
"I guess I really blew it," he says.
As poor Joe is being led off to jail, he, like many criminals begins to regret his deed
says.
As this case comes to court, the
law could take even more ridiculous twists.
Will手kerchiefs be the key evidence admitted at a trial? Will they be cleaned first?
Maybe habitual offenders will be allowed the option of a reform school, much like the schools for
CHRIS BARBER
excessive behind-the-wheel offenders. At this school, inmates could learn proper techniques for blowing their noses quietly or ways to avoid blowing them at all.
These habitual criminals would be easy to spot. A heroin addict can wear long sleeves to hide his track manicure. They can also put the puffy, red nostrils of the guy who goes out to blow too often.
It's almost too easy to picture poor Joe talking to his new collimate
"What're you in for?" he says, as he steps through the cell door.
"Oh, armed robbery. Cattle rustling," the burly, unshaven inmate replies. "How 'bout you?"
Maybe after three or four years, Joe could get out for good behavior. I suppose the only way this could be decided would be something similar to preschool report cards that say "I think you should map time, and he blows his nose in a manner that's not loud, obnoxious or offensive."
Will society spurn poor Joe, now that he has paid his dues? I think there may always be a suspicion that a hardened criminal such as Joe can never be completely rehabilitated.
Anyway, Joe probably will get thrown down in prison for parole violations. He probably will get released at WaMai buying Kleenexes.
What is the poor person in a restaurant with a runny nose supposed to do? If one begins leaving the table every time the nose needs blows, some people wouldn't have time to eat.
Maybe Williams thinks he has
hit the problem on the nose. But I doubt the existence of any recent polls in which voters list offensive nose-blowing as one of the biggest issues facing Missouri. State representatives should have somewhat more pressing issues on their minds.
Williams, planning to lift America up by its shirtsleeves, must have been quite a hit on the campaign trail.
"I'm going to end poverty!" Williams screams.
"Yeah!" a thousand fans chant back.
'Yeah!'
"I'm going to end discriminat ion!"
"And, if elected, I'm going to once and for all stop those guys who sit by you in restaurants and blow their nose in a loud, obnoxious or offensive manner!"
"Huh?"
Williams was elected to see to the demands of his constituents. The Missouri General Assembly docket is probably already too congested to deal with this sort of bill.
Although it may not blow over, nose blowing isn't a problem that needs to be wiped out.
A peace proposal we can live without
Although it hasn't been in the news recently, there is a drive underway to secure federal funds for a national peace academy. Rep. Dan Glickman, D-Kan, is a leading proponent of the idea.
As envisioned, the academy would be a federally created, non-profit, interdisciplinary institution devoted to the study and research of resolving conflicts. Even more importantly, it would emphasize the application of that research. It is to complement our traditional military defense, not oppose it.
Last year, more than 225 members of Congress co-sponsored the peace academy legislation, so passage of this year is a distinct possibility.
While I do not doubt the good intentions of the academy's supporters, I think the $20 million to $30 million that it would cost just to start the institution can and should be put to better use. Can you even imagine two years down the road? It would be like voting against peace!
While my opposition has a purely political component — I think the academy would become another national soakbox from which military doves could pontificate — I have
problems with some of the underlying assumptions.
The proposal assumes that after much academic study, there will be an academic conclusion as to the causes and remedies of conflicts. But the question over why conflicts arise has gone on for more than two millennia.
As assistant director of the President's Commission on Executive Exchange, Franklin L. Lavin pointed out that diverse schools of thought existed — schools such as those that supported the economic, biological, psychological, military, spiritual, political and geographical-deterministic theories. And each has its own supporting data. Until conflict resolution theorists have resolved some of their own conflicts, the academic discipline called peace
BRYAN DANIEL Staff Columnist
studies merits no special recognition from the federal government.
Also implicit in the concept of the peace academy is the belief that there is some universally agreed-upon definition of peace. Is it a mere absence of war, extermination of the opponent, Cold War co-existence or everyone living in a state of freedom? And is the peace exemplified in the acts of a Mother Theresa of Calcutta the same as that of a Lech Walesa or a winner of the Lenin Peace Prize?
The answer. I think, is no.
The answer, I think, is no.
Peace is a treasured human
resource. Proocessor, marchhists,
right-wing dictators and totalitarian
all recognize that and insist
that they seek peace, too. But that's
questionable.
Many of them cloak evil intentions in a flowery rhetoric. Underneath, they still think that "my" way is the road to peace: "his" is not.
Supporters of the academy tend to think that "conflict is not caused by differences which are reconcilable, but simply by ignorance as to how differences can be reconciled." Lavin said. According to this logic, Afghan freedom fighters are going about it all wrong.
Rather than conduct an armed rebellion, they should study the
situation, write it up in a paper and then use it to convince the Soviet Red Army to withdraw. But it takes two to tango, and those who most need to attend the Peace Academy would be the most conspicuous absentees.
Proponents point to the Camp David peace accords as an example of the fruits of conflict resolution. They are right. And the peace accords were accomplished without benefit of a national peace academy. The United States did diplomacial rather than military solutions to problems in the future.
In 1881, Congress received a report about the feasibility of establishing a national peace academy. The report recommended that one be established, but it was not done. In his dissent, the late Rep John Ashbrook, R-Ohio, advanced a most compelling argument against the idea.
"If a government Peace Academy exists it will either force citizens to subsidize the promotion of beliefs they disagree with, or allow research decisions to be swayed by popular pressures. The only way out of this dilemma is to leave the frontiers of controversial research in the private sector, which is where they belong in a free society."
Amen.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Misconceptions allegations and criticisms
The impression one might receive from the article in the Feb. 4 edition of the Kansan concerning the selection of Senate committees is that representatives of & Toto Too are sabotaging the fairness and harmony of the new Senate. This is untrue. The claims made by Staci Feldman, allied health student senator, are unsubstantiated by any evidence and are motivated by a personal grudge over the non-position of a friend on a desired committee — hardly what one hopes for from a supposedly objective senator and board member. Her claim that a vote was taken before she left the meeting early to eat should be easily proven, as shr
I think it is necessary to respond to the allegations of misconduct made against members of the Committee and officers of the Student Senate.
The claim of David Epstein, Nunemaker senator, that he was the only senator denied his first choice of committee seat is blatantly untrue. There are at least eight senators who were denied their first choice of committees, along with more than 25 senators who were denied their second or third choices, which was consistent with the board's policy.
was the recording secretary of the board, and one might reasonably expect that she would have written minutes to back up her complaint.
Feldman had a copy of this policy and was present when it was approved, but apparently did not respond to senators or personal friends.
The Committee Board sought to place Epstein where he might serve in the best interests of the Senate. His recent actions and statements are usually associated with poor losers and give cause for us to wonder about the possibility of committing further to the Senate and the students he claims to represent.
We now come to William Easley, our president. He is certain that "personality and coalition conflicts"
are the root of all this evil. Easily is of questionable reliability as a commentator, since he attended, at most, maybe one hour of what was a ten-to-10 hour process. He also did not attend the specific meeting in question (on Jan. 19) but instead left to watch the KU game.
Finally, we come to Jeff Polack,
vice president. However, he also
bypassed the Saturday sessions to
watch the game. Polack's claim that
there were "a lot of 3-2 votes" is,
at best, inaccurate or, at worst,
a conscious distortion of what he knows
to be true.
Easley did not show any great concern or commitment to the processes he allegedly oversees and now criticizes. I think the Committee Board acted openly and fairly. It is not our responsibility to instruct the student body president as to his obligations of office.
The alleged 3-2 votes numbered no more than five or six. When one compares these five or six votes against almost 200 applications, the shortcomings of Polack's mathematical abilities become apparent.
There can be no final answers found here to resolve this dispute.
That will come when the Senate convenes and votes on tonight. The Committee Board has been subjected to intense scrutiny and has maintained its objectivity while striving for fairness. But we are also students, and the suspicions whispered around us cannot help but arouse some anger. Why is there tension within the Senate? It is because there are those who remain unwilling to work together for the betterment of student government. There are those who would rather cast political labels and attempt to resurrect party antagonisms instead of seeking dialogue and mutual respect.
The leadership of the Student Senate has retained the "us" versus "them" perspective of groups within student government. Easley and Polack campaigned in part on the idea that people can change the structures and operations of the Senate from within. By the same token, people can hinder and diminish the Senate from the same position. Easley and Polack have not demonstrated the willingness and desire to communicate with all groups of the Senate.
A victory is a victory. One can deny the voice of the voters, but now is the time to stop playing "the winner" and work with other elected Senate groups. Leadership must be more than intimidation — it must lead by consensus. They are not annointed, merely elected representatives. Let us hope they regain sight of this fact.
They threaten and yell or walk out of meetings when disagreements surface, as they did at both the initial Committee Board meeting and the organizational gathering of the committees. Why? Because by claiming to have authority or power that is explicitly granted to them they hoped to intimidate others into accepting their arguments or ideas. This is not the maturity and openness we had expected.
Michael Foubert chairman of Committee Board
Opting for optimism
to the editor:
I would like to comment briefly on
Julia Brown's letter (Jan. 30) regarding the performance of the Kansas basketball team and Larry Brown's coaching ability.
To the editor:
Of course it is a disappointment to all — Larry Brown, players and fans — that the basketball team has been playing poorly in the past weeks. Brown made valid criticisms of the team's performance in her letter; rebounding, fouling and team work have all been poor in recent games.
I object, however, to the disgust and disappointment Brown voiced. Certainly it is far more important and constructive to express positive support for the team's effort and to show pride in its Top 20 ranking.
It should be noted that there are a great many basketball fans who support and praise the Kansas basketball team. Hopefully, Larry Brown and players will work and remain optimistic about the game, knowing that there are still many people behind the team, rather than criticizing it, will help them in improving their game and finishing on top.
Sarah Trummel West Hartford, Conn.. freshman