OPINION
The University Daily KANSAN
The University Daily KANSAN
March 29,1984 Page 4
Published since 1889 by students of the University of Kansas
The University Daily Kansas (USPS 605440) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Stauffer-Finn Hall, Lawrence, KS. 60043, daily during the regular school year and Monday and Thursday during the summer session, excludes weekdays from Friday to Saturday. Second charge payable at a $14 fee are are $15 for six months or $24 in December. Third charge payable at a $3 fee are a $9 fee outside the county. Student subscriptions are a $9 semester paid through the student activity fee. POSTMASTER send address changes to: USPS 605440, 118 Stauffer-Finn Hall, Lawrence, KS.
DOUG CUNNINGHAM
DON KNOX
Managing Editor
SARA KEMPIN
Editorial Editor
JEFF TAYLOR ANDREW HARTLEY Campus Editors News Editor
PAUL JESS
Business Manager
DAVE WANAMAKER Business Manager
CORT GORMAN JILL MITCHELL
Retail Sales Manager National Sales Manager
General Manager and News Adviser
JANICE PHILLIPS  DUNCAN CALIHUN
Campus Sales Manager  Classified Manager
Stop drug traffic
JOHN OBERZAN Sales and Marketing Adviser
In the world of cocaine abuse there are many losers.
As with abusers of other drugs, families, co-workers, friends and others suffer from one person's addiction.
But with cocaine, the circle of those who feel the impact of the drug's popularity is even wider.
The influx of the large amounts of money which the drug business produces can create a distorted economy, as it has in some areas of South America.
Then merchants begin demanding higher prices, knowing that there are people who have the money to continue buying their goods.
Similar to the oil boom in Alaska or Venezuela, the cocaine market has produced temporary wealth for a number of people.
The people who suffer are the residents of the area who are not reaping the financial rewards of the illegal drug business and still must pay the high prices.
Once the drug reaches this country, it wreaks further havoc.
That amount would have bought as much as $1.2 billion had it been sold on the streets in the United States.
Businesses go under when profits are diverted to pay for drug habits. Huge drug profits remain free of taxes, because there are no records of transactions. And organized crime has another area in which to exercise its power and corruption.
Last week, authorities in the Caqueta Province of Colombia made the world's largest drug bust, seizing between 10,000 kilograms and 12,000 kilograms of cocaine.
Efforts to curb cocaine use in the United States often begin in South America, where the drug is grown and processed before being smuggled into this country.
By stopping the drug business at its source, many people along the path that the drug takes as it makes its way from the grower to the user, will be spared the negative effects of cocaine.
Oil shortages looming
Long lines at service stations, talk of gas rationing and price gouging are no longer as commonplace as they were during the recent worldwide energy shortage.
Energy experts point to the growth of imports and the reduction in domestic oil reserves.
American anxiety and fear of running out of oil has been replaced by contentment and complacency. But such complacency is unrealistic.
As Sen. James A. McClure, an Idaho Republican and chairman of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee, recently said. "We're fat, dumb and happy."
And the oil reserves of other countries have enabled the United
States to drastically reduce dependence on Middle East oil.
By 1990, the United States will be more dependent on OPEC than ever and thus more vulnerable to economic blackmail. Steps need to be taken now to provide alternative energy sources if oil is disrupted in the future.
Nuclear power has proven too expensive and synthetic fuels environmentally unattractive as alternative sources of energy.
Federal financing of solar research and ocean thermal energy have been reduced by the Reagan administration.
Congress and the present administration need to address the problem of long-term energy security before it is too late for alternatives.
Phrase is now a cliche
When does a simple turn of phrase become an authentic cliche? You know, the kind of thing that if you hear it one more time, you'll go stark, raving bonkers.
Well, it starts with something simple, yet catchy, like a TV commercial. And then it gets to be the punch line in a Johnny Carson loke.
Then the 80-plus-year-old lady who uttered the words in the now-famous commercial becomes a media star, appearing on TV talk shows and the network morning programs.
And then it gets picked up by someone really important, say, a presidential candidate. Then the nightly news starts picking up on it, as the same presidential candidate begins to enjoy the turn of phrase and use it over and over and over.
Now said media star is going to cut a record and make an MTV video, for heaven's sake. Is there no end to it?
to their 2-year-old brothers, just to further drive their parents crazy.
Tell you one thing, if we ever catch up with the genius who wrote "Where's the beef?" we've got only three words for him — "Make my day."
Boston Herald
And then it starts cropping up on T-shirts. Little girls start teaching it
The University Daily Kansan welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be typewritten, double-spaced and should not exceed 300 words. They should include the writer's name, address and phone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, the letter should include his class and home town or faculty or staff position. The Kansan may also invite individuals to submit an email guest columns. Columns and letters can be mailed or brought to the Kansan office. 111 Stauffer Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit or reject letters and columns.
EXT TIME YOU HAVE TO FACE A COMMITTEE OF PESKY, NITPICKING SENATORS WITH A SILLY FIXATION FOR THE FACTS, TRY...
LETTERS POLICY
Don't tax business more
State legislators seem to think that Kansas needs wealthier home-owners.
And if our state changes its constitution to allow a classification taxing system, Kansas may for a certain amount of time sanctuary legislators are planning.
But amid the fight to classify property so that homeowners would pay a lesser percentage for the cost
MICHAEL
BECK
Staff Columns
of government, proponents of the plan are forgetting one important aspect of our state's economy — industry.
And in raising the percentage of taxes industries pay, Kansans may see the move as poor populists against the fat cats of the world.
This idea, however, is bunk. And raising the amount of taxes industries pay more than raising the amount of benefits that benefit homeowners only briefly.
It's easy to justify pushing the burden of taxation onto industry. Stereotypes depict industrialists as evil capitalists, bent on destroying everything from the environment to the lives of small children.
In the longrun, the measure would be detrimental to Kansans. But unfortunately, legislators haven't trashed the plan because they want to avoid tax increases from imminent property reappraisal.
Thus, the issue of the tax classification seems to boil down to recent attempts at forcing property reapraisal.
The last appraisal was in 1963, and whether this new measure passes or not, Kansas will be appraised within the next two years because the appraised values of many counties are inaccurate.
Eventually, businesses would refuse to invest in Kansas, where they would be discriminated against.
As the taxing system is now, all taxable assets is assessed at 30 percent of its market value. Under the proposed taxing system, voters would establish classes of property whereby homeowners' property would be assessed at a lower percentage than industries.
Mercants and farmers, as well as homeowners, would benefit for awhile from the proposed tax scheme, which makes it more palatable to a greater number of people.
Douglas County has a fairly well updated appraised value, so reap-
But because of the extra burden on industry, homeowners, merchants and farmers would suffer because the number of jobs is bound to decrease as industry goes elsewhere.
praisal won't have that much of an impact.
But legislators want to soften the drastic impact reappraisal would have on those counties who have not been vaccinated to avoid problems at election time.
A hard look at this tax measure shows a criminal lack of concern for the future of Kansas in an attempt to get legislators reelected.
We must retain equality in our taxing methods. Discriminating against industry, though it is in vogue, is unwise and will be detrimental to the future of the state.
And while the governor and other liberal governmental leaders push for the new taxing measure, they contradict themselves by also trying to attract new businesses to Refintech. Return the governor's high-ttech task force?
Kansas should see through all the politics and short-sided assessments of this taxing issue. If Kansans are to gather in force to protest one issue, it should be this one.
Homeowners are important to Kansas. But Kansas should not place an undue burden on industry in the area, there would be few homeowners.
And with this taxing proposal, the homeowner sanctuary legislators have planned would fade away with the exodus of industry.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Despite a couple of factual inaccuracies (Richard Hell comes from New York, not England) the story is well worth reading for more positive aspects of punk rock.
To the editor:
However, I was dismayed by an idea conveyed by the article, and unfortunately prevalent among young people that English punk rock is dead.
I was quite surprised by the article "Mainstream just isn't punk" in the March 20 University Daily Kansas.
Nothing is further from the truth. The "fifth wave" of English punk has spawned such groups as Amebix, Rudimentary Peni, and also make punk that is as vital and energetic as any American punk band.
They merely suffer from the same media blackballing as Minor Threat, Void and Black Flag suffer from here. The fact that they are 4,000 miles away only heightens their obscurity.
Don't get me wrong — I wholeheartedly agree that the best punk is made right here in the United States; it just sickens me to see this form of Anglophobia perpetuated — especially when it isn't true.
The British wrote off American punk in 1980-1981; let's be careful not to turn the tables.
Offensive attack
Mike Wahweotten
Lawrence_freshman
I am writing in response to the offensive greeting I was given when I attempted to patronize the UFS midnight movie "Emmanuelle" last Saturday. (University Daily Kansan, March 26.)
To the editor:
As a long-time feminist and past program chair of the Lawrence chapter of the National Organization for Women, I was surprised and intrigued by the beauty of the placard-carrying film protesting the X-rated French film, but because of the repeated jeering of the group.
I am sure the intentions of the group were as worthy and laudable as the overdue Equal Rights Amendment.
As another couple and my wife and I approached the auditorium, we were told that "we would have to go somewhere else to see a rape tonight."
And there is little doubt the group meant only to further the goals of feminism. But few beneficial results could have been obtained that night with such behavior. More harm was the cause by alienating the audience.
None of us meant any harm; we had heard from other friends that the film was most acceptable. We didn't, and still don't', since all the tickets were sold before we arrived, know of any rape scene in the film.
If I had known of such a scene, it would have influenced my decision to see the movie considerably, since the film is sympathetic to feminist concerns.
No one in our group, however, was persuaded to forego seeing the film.
If anything, I will be more likely to avoid future events involving people that intrude us; then I will another showing of "Emmanuelma."
The Women's Coalition at the University of Kansas has presented such a movie several times to the benefit of many who attended.
I shouldn't criticize, however,
without making a constructive
suggestion. For example, an advertisement or letter to the editor appear before the film was
could have warned of effusive material.
I would gladly have read such a review before deciding whether I would attend. Or flyers announcing the next showing of a film explaining the damnation, and that it was against and exploitation of women could have been distributed.
I hope this letter is read by the dedicated and hard-working people who picketed the film Saturday night. Their cause is too important to be impeded by such unfortunate occurrences.
To the editor:
In response to the editorial printed on "separate senates," I find it amusing how some people can hear and see only what they want.
Richard W. Couch
Richard W. Coxen
Lawrence graduate student
A narrow vision
Just for the record, let's get a few things straight.
One, Black Student Union is open to all people. Our budget request was based on a desire to provide programs and activities which culturally educate minority and minority students, staff and faculty.
Or did our letter asking for the resignation of the Senate staff provoke retaliation? In the past, groups who have had fewer memoirs are more likely to thousands of dollars without a fuss. So why are we being singled out?
The fact that our budget request was attacked deserves special attention. Could it be that BSU has angered some people by keeping the Student Senate Minority Affairs Committee a standing committee?
Two, when BSU made its budget request, it unintentionally overlooked the fact that the student activity fee was used for more than student organizations. You can rest assured that black students will continue to pay for facilities and services like everyone else.
Three, BSU is not trying to create a separate Senate exclusively for blacks. BSU was established as a support group because existing organizations did not fulfill black students' needs. BSU has never closed its door, meetings or ears to anyone.
BSU is striving toward fulfilling the Rev. Martin Luther King Jr.'s dream. I urge you, the members of this University, to join us in our
And last, but not least, BSU seeks to counter racism and discrimination by promoting better communication, understanding and respect among all students, staff and faculty.
Cheri L. Brown President BSU
Proposal is too narrow for students
Some ideas at this University remain just that — ideas. They are never put into action.
And sometimes the University community is better for it.
One such idea that should be promptly dropped is a proposal by housing and residence hall officials to prohibit hall residents from having visitors of the opposite sex in their rooms. The proposal is scheduled to be considered today by the Residential Programs Advisory Board.
Of course, as officials point out, this rule would be in effect only during certain hours, such as from 11 p.m. to 6 a.m. The exact hours would vary by residence hall.
According to Fred McElhenie director of the office of residen
The proposal seems to be a move to promote uniformity of thinking. Perhaps, if the powers that be can get everyone to act alike, dresse like and be alike, nasty problems such as how to deal with locked-out roommates won't have to be dealt with.
DOUG
CUNNINGHAM
Editor
tial programs, the advisory board has several good reasons to consider such a change in the rules.
For example, he says security is a prime concern, as unregistered and unescorted guests sometimes come into the halls. If a change is needed because of the implicit rationale be that residents are sometimes threatened as a result of these visitors.
Are not the present procedures sufficient to protect residents? And if not, why not? What would you do to counter any security problems?
Quite simply, extremely little. I lived in a KU residence hall for two years. Even when one of the two paid security monitors onduty was asleep — as was sometimes the case — I certainly did not feel threatened during my time at the hall.
This proposal, as I see it, is symptomatic of everything that is wrong with the KU residence hall system.
Complaints from parents about the present system are one reason to adopt the proposal, McEhlene said.
Certainly, parents of KU students have a right to expect that this University will provide their offspring the chance to get a good education. And, for those students whose parents have a right to expect a safe and reasonable living environment.
Parents have no right to expect that the University and its bureaucracy will take their place and make sure that Johnnie and Susie get enough sleep, eat healthy food and take the opposite sex after-hours.
What exactly is the goal of the residence hall system? Should it be to solve conflicts between roommates that are best solved by the roommates themselves? What about thousands of halls residents because of the problems caused by a few? Most importantly, should the residence hall system act as a surrogate parent?
I think not.
To read the details of this proposal, one would think that relations between the sexes are in the dark ages. Sometimes, heaven forbid, a hall resident might want to have a guest stay look at, look at now, this guest might even be of the opposite sex.
Stop the presses! Students at KU sometimes sleep together—be solved by adopting a patently ridiculous proposal.
What would change is this: The University bureaucracy would have another item to monitor. The proposal would do nothing except to make more work for residence hall employees.
Imagine the possibilities. And then, if you are a reasonable sort, you will realize that some aspects of student life should be left alone. Students who live in KU residence halls do not surrender their freedoms at the front desk to the authorities. They freedoms of association and of choosing one's friends should not be tossed around lightly.
Students will be served best if this proposal is soundly rejected.