Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY Kansan
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
Published daily since 1912
4A
Lindsey Henry, Editor Marc Harrell, Business manager Dave Morantz, Managing editor Colleen Eager, Retail sales manager Kristie Blasi, Managing advisor Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser Justin Knupp, Technology coordinator
Thursday, Feb. 19, 1998
PHILADELPHIA DAILY NEWS
Point-Counterpoint
In favor: Holdover senators create valuable institutional memory
A recent attempt by Student Senate to abolish Holdover senator seats is misguided and a waste of effort. It is also being sponsored by a senator who obviously forgot how he got his job.
Holdover seats are reserved for senators not elected to seats in the last senate election. At the end of the year, the new senate and outgoing Senate meet and elect three people as Holdover senators.
The thinking is that although these people were not elected by students, they are all former senators who know how things operate and can offer advice and aid to those who have never been in Senate.
Jason Fizell, Liberal Arts and Sciences senator, has sponsored a bill that would abolish this practice. His
reasoning is that these seats are not elected by students and are not true representatives who serve students.
But there are problems with this line of thinking.
It must be pointed out that Fizell, who lost last year's student body president election, was not elected himself. He is a replacement senator. He was voted into Senate by Senate to fill a spot left empty by a resigning senator. Fizell, like him or not, has brought important issues before Senate. He himself has proven that just because someone is not elected by students, he or she still can be a valuable member who can offer insight and be productive. It is hypocritical of Fizell to want to get rid of a seat that mirrors his own.
Holdover senators serve an important purpose. They have been in Senate before and know how it operates. In a Student Senate where the term is just one year, that can be an asset to incoming senators who have questions. Other new senators can't help them or offer direction during meetings and important debates. Only experienced senators can do that.
To not have these people would create even more chaos than the current Senate has.
There is nothing wrong with Hold-over senators.
Although they are not elected by the students, they still have to answer to students when bonehead decisions are made.
Spencer Duncan is a member of the editorial board
Against: All senators should be elected
Last spring two student senators lost their bids for re-election. In a system that somehow is a representative democracy, these two students plus a third who didn't run again, bypassed elections and remained senators.
Every year, the newly elected Senate and the previous year's Senate choose three Holdover senators. These three, although not re-elected by students, are given positions of prestige and influence within Student Senate. The three Holdover senators make up one-fourth of University Council, the highest body of government on which students can sit.
Supporters of the Holdover senator positions claim that it gives Senate institutional memory. The three senators were a part of the previous year's Senate, and so are needed to explain precedents
and history. However, institutional memory is always present. The necessary knowledge is possessed by reelected senators, Senate advisers, and the Senate executive board as well.
The Holdover senator positions are intended to be a way to reward those senators who have done good work, and to ensure that diligent and able senators are able to stay in Senate. But isn't that what elections are for? A democracy works because it calls for citizens to choose their representatives. If someone in office does a good job, they will be relected. By allowing the previous year's Senate to choose the Holdover senators, the basic tenets of democracy are being ignored. Because the holdovers are granted their positions by fellow senators, they are being chosen based on
what they have done for those in power — not on what they have done for students. It's easy to see how the system could be abused. It could easily be a way for coalitions to reward their supporters.
Unlike Replacement senators, which are perhaps a necessary evil, Holdover senators are completely unnecessary. The position serves only to taint the representative qualities of Student Senate and allow for coalitions to set up a system of rewards. Senate Rights Committee recently passed a bill that, if passed in Senate, will get rid of the holdover senator positions. This is a step in the right direction. Students who cannot get reelected or who don't care enough to go through the hassle of campaigning should not be able to have power in a democracy.
Susan Dunavan is a member of the editorial board
Kansan staff
Paul Eakins ... Editorial
Andy Obermueller ... Editorial
Andrea Albright ... News
Jodie Chester ... News
Julie King ... News
Charity Jeffries ... Online
Eric Weslander ... Sports
Harley Rattiff ... Associate sports
Ryan Koerner ... Campus
Mike Perryman ... Campus
Bryan Volk ... Features
Tim Harrington ... Associate features
Steve Puppe ... Photo
Angle Kuhn ... Design, graphics
Mitch Lucas ... Illustrations
Corrie Moore ... Wire
Gwen Oison ... Special sections
Lachelle Roades ... News clerk
News editors
Kristi Bistel Assistant retail, PR
Leigh Bottiger Campus
Brett Clifton Regional
Nicole Lauderdale National
Matt Fisher Marketing
Chris Haghrian Internet
Brian Allers Production
Ashley Bonner Production
Andee Tomlin Promotions
Dan Kim Creative
Rachel O'Neill Classified
Tyler Cook Zone
Steve Grant. Zone
Jamie Holman Zone
Brian LeFevre Zone
Matt York Zone
Advertising managers
"The best number for a dinner party is two — me and a damn good head waiter."
—Nubar Gulbenkian
How to submit letters and guest columns
Lettert: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns* Should be double- spaceped typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staufer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions.
For any questions, call Paul Eakins (eakins@kansan.com) or Andy Obermueler (andyo@kansan.com) at 864-4810. If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4810.
Drivers:honk if you love nuclear waste, cancer
Current actions of our U.S. Congress have the potential to send the process of evolution careening off in new directions — or wait it altogether. They could accomperhaps end it altogether. plish this feat by exposing 52 million Americans in 43 states to the dangers of radioactive waste transport accidents.
Perspective
A U.S. bill, which has been nicknamed Mobile Chernobyl, would cause high-level radioactive waste to be transported during an approximately 30-year period from storage in 70 reactor sites to a single dump in Yucca Mountain, Nev. The bill has been passed in both the House and Senate, but President
Andrea Repinsky
opinion@kanan.com
Clinton has promised a veto. My fear, the fear of other KU Environs members, and the fear of people across the country, is that a veto either will not be delivered or will be overridden.
This fear is justified, as is fear of the bill itself. The first fear we would face with the bill would be the dangers of transporting the waste. According to the Nuclear Information Resource Service, 15,000 shipments would be carrying casks of radioactive waste on truck and train. At least 6,000 of those would travel through Lawrence on highways such as I-70. Both security and accidents are serious concerns, especially since the nuclear industry expects one accident for every 343 shipments, according to the Nuclear Age Peace Foundation.
Once the waste reaches Nevada, there are more problems with the plan. The chosen site, Yucca Mountain, is on the Shoshone Indian Reservation. The Shoshone do not even want the site. Although the site is definite, no one knows how to store the waste so that it permanently would be isolated from the biosphere. Proponents of the bill are trying to make up for their lack of knowledge by sneaking an unreviewed provision into it which would exempt the project from meeting the Environmental Protection Agency's storage standards. What does this say? Legislators don't want to find a way to do the
project safely they just want to do it, and take the chance that the groundwater could get contaminated with radiation.
The skeptic inside you probably is thinking, "Because of Environ's glowing reputation as an organization of the highest caliber, I want to believe you. But don't the nuclear power plants have good reasons for wanting a central storage facility?" It is true that many reactors are experiencing a shortage of on-site storage space for their spent fuel rods, and expansion of the storage space would be an expensive endeavor. A remedy certainly is needed. However, it should not be a poorly-researched one. We don't want a solution that seriously would threaten the safety of about 75 percent of the U.S. population in an attempt to bail out the nuclear industry. It doesn't know how to dispose of the dangerous waste it is creating, yet still it expands and continues reactor operations. Nor do we want a solution which would give terrorists 30 years and 15,000 shipments to perfect their methods of sabotaging waste transports.
I wouldn't scare you like this without telling you what can be done to protect your safety. First you should take a few minutes to learn about the issue, which you can do on the KU Environs webpage at www.ukans.edu/~environs/.
If the information you find there increases your motivation to avoid unnecessary mutations and cancer, you then should contact your senators and representatives, and tell them what you think about how they voted on the Mobile Chernobyl bill. Then write to Clinton, and remind him of his veto promise. Did any legislators vote responsibly on Mobile Chernobyl? If so, then thank them. Remember to tell them that you are a registered voter. When the next elections begin and you are standing at the polling booth, consider the incumbent candidates' stances on this issue.
The most immediate action you can take is to join us today in front of Watson Library. Environs will be offering a supplemental educational opportunity at 12:20 p.m. It will explore the dangers of high-level radioactive waste transport in a most entertaining fashion.
Andrea Repinsky is an Olathe junior in environmental studies.
Perhaps Kurt Cobain should've lived at Templin
Y'aknow, I was thinking in the bathroom the other day. That is where I do most of my thinking, actually. And I came to a conclusion: It's probably really hard to kill yourself
First and foremost, there's the difficulty of getting your implements of extinction past your roommate. Sure, you can smuggle in rope for a noose, a gun, plastic bags for suffocation or razor blades in your backpack, but you've got to hide them pretty well, or else there're many inconvenient questions to answer.
cluition; it's probably while living in a residence hall. It seemed to me that it'd be more of an effort than I'm willing to expend.
Nick Spacek opinion@kansan.com
But let's say that you do manage to get your stuff in and get it hidden. Now there's the question of how you're gonna kill yourself. If you want to hang yourself, you've got to find something to hang yourself from. In my dorm room, the only thing to hang yourself from is the water pipes. You hang yourself from these babies, the damn things are going to break, water will be everywhere, and then you have a LOT of explaining to do.
Using a gun will just make a lot of noise, and you'll probably flinch at the last minute, thus only grazing yourself and probably putting a hole in your favorite poster. If you do manage to keep a steely grip on Mr. Revolver, you'll most likely end up waking your neighbor when the gun goes off. Then, as you're lying on the ground, an ever-widening pool of blood growing around your prone body, the last thing you hear will be a pounding
on the door and the words, "Hey, could you keep it down? People are trying to sleep." And it doesn't matter what time you choose, someone is always asleep.
Also, if you want to kill yourself in your room,
you have to work around your roommate's schedule.
If his classes are at about the same time as
yours, there's not going to be a lot of free time for
you to work up the initiative to want to snuff your
flame of existence.
So, if you can't end it all in your room. Where to go next? The bathroom is a good choice if you want to slit your wrists. That way, there'll be no blood to mop up. The water in the shower will do nicely to wash away all that messy blood. But there are people coming in and out all the damn time. If you manage to figure out a time with no people to distract you, there's the matter of remembering to slit your wrists in the right way — down the vein, not across. Plus, if you're lying in the shower, the thirst will most likely be running after you pass out from lack of vital fluids. Most likely a neighbor is gonna notice that.
Then, there's the noise. What noise, you ask? Well, there're two that pop into my head. First, the screams of pain as the soap accidentally gets into the cuts in your wrists. Secondly, the thump as your body drops to the tiles and you fade into unconsciousness.
So, in conclusion, if you want to kill yourself, don't do it in the residence halls. wait until your next trip home. You can save your folks that nasty call from the campus police asking to come and identify the body AND you'll die in the familiar setting you grew up in.
Nick Spacek is a Lansing freshman in journalism. He's not allowed to have sharp objects.
Feedback
Coverage of Iraqi standoff skewed
I am little bit surprised to see the content of President Clinton's speech at the Pentagon published in the Feb. 18 issue of The University Daily Kansan.
Part of Clinton's speech that was published in the Associated Press story that the Kansan printed made Clinton appear to be a peace-loving president trying to solve a world's crisis. In reality, I don't think this is true. As Americans, many students think that the AP is a widely-respected news organization. But as a foreigner and a person who listens to news from international media such as BBC and Reuter, I think that the AP is anti-Muslim and anti-Arab. It manipulates news to create American public opinion
But since your newspaper— along with the AP—has cleverly omitted the objectionable part of Clinton's speech, those good American students are not aware what their president was saving.
I understand that there are many good American students at the University of Kansas who will also question Mr. Clinton for his strident and war-like attitude and his calling a human being a predator.
The truth is that Bill Clinton "sounded more strident and warlike," as the BBC commented. Mr. Clinton's reference to Saddam Hussein as a predator received wide criticism from observers in various newsgroups of the Internet.
against Arab countries.
I know that not all readers will agree with me and that the Kansan can't fix the whole U.S. media.
ing information. I think they are trying hard to portray American aggression as peace keeping and Iraq's strife for self-defense as a threat to their neighbors and the world.
I think that the U.S. media has turned the Iraqi confrontation into a circus of lies and mislead-
But still, as today's editor of the Kansan and tomorrow's editor of the Washington Post and New York Times, you need to be aware of the truth that the AP, CNN and many other U.S. media do not provide you accurate information. And the only way you can accomplish that by reading news from the sources outside of the United States.
Sohel Khan Lawrence graduate student