4
Wednesday, June 10, 1992
OPINION
UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
FROM THE EDITORS
Finance issues need to be raised in elctions
Where have all the professors gone?
How will we ever learn?
This situation is becoming more and more of a problem in many universities in Kansas, and across the nation.
However, as more and more universities and colleges across the nation find their instructors leaving for better opportunities, administrators and students are asking a different question.
Where has all the financing gone?
This is a good question. Over the past few years enrollment figures at most universities and colleges have either climbed slowly or shot up. There are simply more students attending school. This should translate into increased tuition money for the individual universities.
Also, tuition has joined the ranks of steadily increasing figures. The cost of attending four years of college in the United States has shot up in the past few years. Increased tuition should also translate in increased money for the universities.
Yet, with increased students and increased tuition, instructors are leaving at a rapid pace, simply because schools can not afford to pay them enough.
Granted, what teachers consider to be adequate pay and what the school feels is adequate may often be two separate things. However, the ability to compromise depends on two things. The financing to meet a comparable offer, and dedication (not just by the instructors) to education.
The question remains: Where has all the financing gone?
It's an interesting question, and one that should not be forgotten during the current election frenzy. As people (students especially) examine the political hopefuls, the question of funding for instructors needs to be raised. And it needs to be answered by someone, not necessarily on the presidential level.
There is no time like the present. Especially in an election year.
With incumbents dropping out of the political spotlight-like leaves from a tree, and record numbers of people stepping forward to challenge the ones hoping to stay in office, the climate has never been better to get politicians thinking about funding for higher education.
Bill Clinton and President Bush have announced they are pro-education. But, all they seem to talk about is primary and secondary levels. They do address, however briefly, the problem of student loans. But, what good are student loans when there are no professors left to teach all the students. It seems Mr. Bush and Mr. Clinton have a little vague on the issue. And, right now, who knows what Mr. Perot stands for.
It comes back to dedication. Which candidate, whether on a state or federal level, is dedicated to assuring that there will be teachers in the universities. It's something to look at.
Without a solid commitment from someone to assure that higher education is funded and placed high on the list of priorates, there may be a different question very soon.
Where has all of the quality education gone?
It's something to think about.
~Justin Knupp
Positive message is key for job-hunting grads
The festive commencement celebrations have ended and so far the aftermath has been downright depressing. Out of 1.1 million new college graduates, statistics show that only a select few are finding jobs after graduation. These numbers also reveal that if graduates are out job-hunting it will take approximately nine to 12 months to land a job in your related field — maybe more. These depressing revelations have many graduates believing that they are doomed to flip burgers at McDonalds forever. And so, many students are continuing their education, traveling or going home to avoid entering the "enpty" market.
For at least one week after KU's graduation on May 17, newscasts around the nation were flooded with employment experts and statistics describing how 1992 was the worst year to graduate since the great depression. So, just in case the graduates stepping out of the security of college were not completely scared to death, these reports would drive home the reality of what hardships they were about to face. Especially for those who would now have to fend for themselves.
Sound familiar? It should. It's nothing you probably haven't heard 1,000 times before in the past month. And that's the point. The problems of the recession, depression, unemployment, layoffs and an overall lack of jobs have been drilled into everyone's mind repeatedly. We read it.
Pretend there are unlimited job opportunities waiting for you to come and get them. Because contrary to popular belief, there are jobs out there — maybe not as many as in the past — but they are there. Finding them is what appears to be the biggest problem. And feeling as though you are about to embark on an endless and hopeless search can certainly hinder the process. In the end, it may be the negative feedback that is contributing to the high number of unemployed graduates.
Maybe it's time for the economists and employment experts, or "declinists," as President Bush calls them, to start focusing on what is available instead of what isn't. There may not be an overabundance of good news, but I'm sure everyone would appreciate hearing what positive information there is. Keeping up morale is an important key in helping these job-seekers out. The last thing a new graduate wants or needs to hear is how bleak their future looks. Such a pessimistic attitude sure can damper many people's spirits and their motivation.
Instead of letting this negativism cloud your perception of what you can do, store them in the back of your mind and start looking. Read the want ads. Talk to contacts. Send out more resumes than you ever dreamed possible. And most importantly, start pounding the pavement. The employment forecast around the nation may be gloomy, but by looking at the brighter side, entering the real world might not seem so bleak
--Jennifer Bach
KANSAN STAFF
JUSTIN KNUPP
Editor
KIM CLAXTON Business manager
JENNIFER BACH Managing editor
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
BRIAN WOLF Director of Client Services
Editors
Campus    Gayle Ostberg
Ast. Campus    Doug Flahack
Copy Cheff    Alex Blohmoff
Contributing    David Mitchell
Photo        Derek Nolan
Graphics     Almee Brainard
JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser
Business Staff
Special Promotions . . . Melissa Tertilp Production mgr . . Brad Green Retail Support mgrs . . Ashley Langford Hilary Wilcox Regional Support mgr . Jane Henderson Classified mgr . . Kate Burgess
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the University of Kansas name, class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. The University of Kansas must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staffer Flint Hall.
Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
Members of Llambs of Christ, an anti-abortion protest group, attend a peaceful demonstration while police officers stand guard. The protest Saturday in Wichita was the first of several planned by the Llambs of Christ. Rev. Norman Weslin, leader of the group, described the protest as a powerful demonstration.
Royal family loses magic sparkle Di-harders need a new hobby
News has been abundant this summer. Wars are raging The economy is still shaky The campaign trail is heating up. But what is the really big news?
Princess Di is an unhappy camper
Everyone cry on the count of three. Give me a big break. For an entire decade, we have been hearing unconfirmed rumors that the House of Windsor is an unhappy home. Now, at last, the brain-dead buyers of the tabloids can worry for sure. This week, a book released in Britain alleged that Diana tried to take her life five times.
She must not be trying very hard.
The biographer claims that the princess' suicide attempts have not been serious attempts, but pitiful cries for help. However, they seem very serious; an intentional fall down a staircase while pregnant, slashed
David Mitchell Contributing editor
wrists and other misadventures in cutlery.
According to the book, Diana's depression stems from Prince Charles' involvement with another woman.
Prince Chuck, a womanizer? Amazing. How can a big-nosed, dumboeared khutz manage to marry a beautiful woman and have another on the side?
Ah, the mystique of royalty. Puke.
I don't mean to bettle suicide. It's terrible that a woman could be tormented by her own husband. On the other hand, I feel little sympathy for her. According to the book, Diana knew of Charles' tryst before their 1981 wedding to end all weddings. She married him anyway. The book also alleges that the princess and Sarah Ferguson, the former Duchess of York, made a pact to leave their royal husbands at the same time.
However, Diana backed out. She said the reason she decided to stay was because of duty to her position and the effect divorce would have on her children. But realistically, what is more damaging to children — the pain of divorce or having an unhappy, suicidal bulimia for a mother? Of course, keep in mind that this is the
same loving mother who threw her self down a flight of stairs while pregnant.
Even more remarkable than the book's revelations is the way Americans eat this garbage up. Our society has a bizarre fascination with beautiful, powerful people of money who screw up a lot. Which, I suppose, explains why we love the Kennedy clan so much. The book will undoubtedly be a huge success.
The Americans that worship and worry about the royal family are probably the same mental midgids that sweated it out wondering which Elvis would get the postage stamp.
The royal family is disintegrating at a rapid pace. I suggest all you Windsor
David Mitchell is a DeSoto senior majoring in journalism.
Cutting defense spending could halt fears
The Cold War is over. And while many of us were thinking that there would be fewer dollars spent on weapons, Congress was approving a $270.5 billion defense authorization bill that is supposed to keep us secure for the next five years. There are a number of questions concerning some of the proposals in the bill, but the general consensus is that we need a strong defense. If the past offers any insight into the future, then we better open our history books again.
Our leaders grew up in a different generation than us. They saw the terrible destruction of a world at war In Melvyn Leffler's book "A Preponderance of Power," Leffler reminds us of the ferocity of world war and the mistrust that follows.
Leaders of the Western nations feared the spread of communism after World War II. Communism virtually was immune to the worldwide depression before the war, and it
Dan
Janousek
Staff
columnist
looked like a good alternative to other political ideologies They also knew nationalism was unpredictable. The Nazi regime subdued their neighbors in the name of nationalism. Nationalism was, and still is, the most destructive force within nations.
Perhaps no other country felt the wrath of nationalism as did the former Soviet Union. More than 1,700 cities and towns and 70,000 villages and hamlets were decimated. The Nazis dismantled 40,000 miles of railroad track, ruined 56,000 miles of main roads and 90,000 bridges. Of the 50 million who died in World War II,20 million were Soviet citizens.
Like the defeat of nationalism, the fall of communism has left a vacuum for subversive elements. Azerbaijan and Armenia are at war. The Czechoslovakian people are contemplating a split. West Germans seem to be disenchanted with their Eastern neighbors. Denmark rejected plans for European Community integration. And we cannot overlook the Yugoslavian nightmare.
Russia has its problems, too. Disagreements between Boris Yeltsin and the Russian Parliament have delayed $24 billion in Western aid. He also appointed former defense industry people to the new government. Its future looks as murky as its past.
That is why the House exceeded predicted costs and approved that $270.5 billion authorization bill last week.
George Bush and Congress can read the headlines as well as anyone. The world is not a safe haven for the weak.
Our leader's fears are justified, but minor cuts are not enough. Does the United States really need a "Star Wars" defense system? For almost 50 years, we deterred missile attack with our retaliatory capability. By continuing the program, we may add to the fears that our posture may someday be offensive.
One administration official said inadequate equipment and the risk of cost overrues was "acceptable given the uncertainty in predicting when we might actually be threatened with ballistic missile attack." My question for him is, by whom? The worries of an aging generation demand our respect. But the worries of this generation deserve equal attention.
Dan Janousek is a senior majoring in journalism.
Loco Locals
by Tom Michaud
1