OPINION
The University Daily KANSAN
February 28,1984 Page 4
The University Daily KANSAN
Published since 1889 by students of the University of Kansas
The University Daily Kansas (USPS 650 460) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Staffer-First Hall, Lawrence, KS 60835, daily during the regular school year and Monday and Thursday during the summer session, excluding holidays. USPS postmaster addresses are by mail for $15 for six months or $27 in Douglas County and $18 in Riverside County. Postmaster addresses outside the student subscriptions are a $13 semester paid through the student activity fee POSTMASTER. Send address changes to
DOUG CUNNINGHAM
DON KNOX
Managing Editor
SARA KEMPIN
Editorial Editor
JEFF TAYLOR ANDREW HARTLEY
Campus Editor News Editor
DAVE WANAMAKER
Business Manager
CORT GORMAN
Retail Sales Manager
National Sales Manager
PAUL JESS
JANCE PHILIPS
Campus Sales Manager
DUNCAN CALHUNO
Classified Manager
PROJEESS General Manager and News Adviser
JOHN OBERZAN Sales and Marketing Adviser
Starting Over deserves an opportunity to lead
For a variety of reasons known and unknown, the Student Senate during the past three years has struggled in its search for credibility and identity.
Inexperienced leadership and high absenteeism have plagued the Senate since its inception. Student government at the University of Kansas, however, suffered its most embarrassing setback when the University Judicial Review Board declared that the Senate's November presidential election was "fraught with ambiguities and inconsistencies."
On the recommendation of the board, Chancellor Gene A. Budig ordered a new presidential election — scheduled for tomorrow and Thursday.
All three coalitions that have chosen to run in this new election contend, idealistically and realistically, that the Senate's difficulties can be worked out — under their leadership, of course.
One coalition says that student government at KU is a joke and that the students cannot be blamed for being apathetic about the it. Another coalition says that "love, trust and respect" are the only solutions to the Senate's problems.
The third coalition claims that the Senate has lost sight of its original purpose — to serve the students of the University.
All three coalitions are justified in their concern for the Senate. In interviews with the Kansas Editorial Board, the candidates outlined their goals for the Senate. All three coalitions should be commended for their willingness to serve the students of this University.
But only one coalition — the Starting Over team of Loren Busby and Paul Buskirk — deserves your vote this week.
Busby and Buskirk have structured their campaign around issues and ideas. Although their opponents complain that they possibly would bring too much experience to the Senate, both candidates display a genuine concern for serving the students and a healthy skepticism about the Senate and about the University administration.
Buskirk was instrumental in reorganizing the Senate's Transportation Board after a former student senator was convicted of embezzling more than $250,000 from the campus bus system.
For three years, Busby has served as chairman of the Senate's powerful Finance and Auditing Committee. His familiarity with Senate policies and his effective control of the committee proved to be two of the Senate's few highlights during the past five years.
Most of all, Busby and Buskirk have throughout their KU careers proved that they are among the most responsible students enrolled here. And during this presidency, which will be four months shorter than usual, responsible action is what is needed most.
Among other things, Starting Over has proposed spending from $20,000 to $30,000 to improve campus lighting. The money would come from the Senate's special projects account, which by law can earn no interest.
More important than spending, however, is Starting Over's intention to work cautiously with the University administration to improve campus life. All too often, the administration has dominated such discussions.
The Starting Over Coalition also has endorsed a plan to take the Senate elections permanently out of Senate control. This pledge is extremely important, because there is little guarantee that the Senate won't return to supervising its own elections after these new presidential elections are conducted by the Lawrence chapter of the League of Women Voters.
The two other coalitions — Costume Party and Apathy, It Just Doesn't Matter — also intelligently discussed issues and proposals, but neither has had the experience or the leadership to ensure that those changes will occur.
Still, Costume Party candidates Carla Vogel and Dennis "Boog" Highberger were particularly articulate in discussing their political views.
Highberger challenged Starting Over's proposal to use $20,000 to $30,000 to improve campus lighting. He instead proposed using that money to finance an escort service to help students get home when they're on campus late at night.
Costume proposed seeking the divestment of the Kansas University Endowment Association's interest in corporations that have ties to South Africa. Vogel and Highberger also said that they thought the University should start a recycling center on campus.
But despite their good intentions, the Costume Party candidates seemed uncertain about how they would institute their proposals. They also were unfamiliar with the financial makeup of the Senate — including the campus bus system, which receives nearly $220,000 in student fees annually.
The Costume Party proposals also were a bit idealistic in tone, but a promise by Highberger to be "a little antagonistic" when dealing with the University administration was heartening.
Apathy's Bob Swain and Robb Murphy were more naive about the Senate's problems, but they approached the issues in a serious manner.
The coalition's main assertion is that nobody cares about the Senate anymore — even the student senators now in office. They cite voter turnout in the last election as an example of student apathy.
The proposal would need to be approved by University administrators and the Board of Regents before it could be put into place. That takes time. Apathy offers no suggestions for ways to motivate senators in the meantime.
Swain proposed beginning a program that would grant a tuition break to senators so that they would be more motivated in seeking the opinions of their constituents.
Although voter apathy is a significant problem at KU, Apathy offered few specific answers to the problem of motivating senators to abandon their "country-club attitude."
Unlike in the November elections, true leadership has emerged in this election in the form of Loren Busby and PaulBuskirk. Both students will go far in asserting themselves as role models for the rest of the Student Senate.
Busby, who ran for student body president in 1981 and who also was endorsed then by this newspaper, lost the election.
The report is a new rubber stamp of old policies thought to protect the economic and strategic interests of the United States and its local allies.
This time, KU students again have the chance to elect people who will truly represent their interests. They must seize the initiative.
The report represents another attempt to see reality through East-West glasses and to ignore the conflicts of Central American countries.
Report a bipartisan cover-up
The miserable conditions in which most Central American people live are seen as fertile ground for a broad-based Communist insurgency."
Upon careful reading, the Kissinger Commission Report is nothing more than a bipartisan cover-up for the military aid to Central America.
We are led to believe that without such external aid, the explosive contraindictions caused by widespread socio-economic injustices would never lead the people of these countries to armed struggle against oppression.
As for "external" intervention, it is appropriate to ask, as a recent editorial in a Venezuelan daily did, "who has opposed the implementation of social reforms, and who has supported the military dictatorships and the predominance of oligarchies in Venezuela," which I quarantued with Latin American affairs the answer is obvious: The United States of America.
The panel tries to attribute such poverty on falling commodity prices and rising energy costs; but, although these factors may have aggravated the present crisis, they are by no means the real causes of the prevailing socio-economic injustices.
The members of the Kissinger panel seem to be unaware that legal opposition has been silenced by the campaign of terror carried out by government forces and government-backed death souls.
A predatory indigenous oligarchy, symbolically linked with U.S. multinational corporations, which puts the sacred god of profit ahead of the welfare of the people, is the real cause of the Central American crisis.
In 1980, U.S. firms recorded a 29.3 percent rate of return on investments in Central America and the Caribbean Basin — as compared with a 17.3 percent average on all foreign investments.
American corporations enjoy tax-free zones and pay local workers approximately $4 a day, or one-tenth the U.S. wage for the same work.
MARCO
JELLINEK
Crest Columns
Guest Columnist
The local ruling class partakes of these enormous profits and organizes the state of terror that keeps workers and peasants from openly protesting the gross exploitation. To address the economic woes of the peasantry, the government of economic assistance for the five-year period starting in 1985.
One-forth of the aid would be channelled through a proposed regional organization called the Central American Development Organization. This body is to be made up of all Central American States and the United States but chaired and controlled by the United States.
Its main role is to encourage investment by the private sector, and it is clearly designed to make
easier the penetration of American corporate and financial capital in the area.
Countries receiving aid through CADO would have to meet certain standards of economic as well as social and political development. Among these are "recurrent elections" and "political pluralism."
But as the history of U.S. foreign policy has shown, the United States has always reserved the right to define such standards and has often ignored them altogether when U.S. monopolistic interests so required it.
From the Monroe, through the Johnson, to the "Reagan" Doctrine, the right of self-determination of the Latin American countries has been conditioned by U.S. economic and political interests.
One can't help wondering how Henry Kissinger will decide whether the different expressions of political reactions measure up to his standards.
After all, it was he who remarked after the leftist government of Salvador Allende was democratically elected, "I don't see why we need to stand here and watch a country go communist due to the irresponsibility of its own people." Soon after, the Allende government was topped by a CIA-engineered coup.
The report also allows for the United States to maintain a bilateral assistance program "regardless of performance" of recipient countries. This means that countries where land reforms are blocked and death squash activities continue unabated will still be eligible for aid.
The whole economic hegemonism and exploitation process is carried out by indigenous and U.S. private interests. The panel argues for a closer partnership with democracies now in power, and the consolidation of U.S. strategic interests.
"To break the military stalemate" in El Salvador, the panel suggests $400 million in U.S. aid for 1984-85. Increased military aid to brutal and corrupt regimes and the insistence on a military solution constitute the real essence of present U.S. foreign policy.
As for Nicaragua, the Sandistas are viewed as a "contingent threat to the stability of the region." But the U.S. backed insurgents (Contras) are seen as an "incentive" toward a negotiated settlement
This position demonstrates that, despite the high-sounding rhetoric about self-determination, the present American leadership reserves the right to intervene militarily against government not to its liking exists.
Since the Sandistas have gained power, the illiteracy rate of Nicaragua has been reduced from 60 to 10 percent, and free medical care is now available to the entire population. The Sandista program has managed to reduce many injuries, higher wages, and increased self-management by workers.
This obviously leads to lower profits for the corporate sector and a more equal and just distribution of income. And this is why the government threat to a U.S. administration represents big business interests.
The Kissinger report is another effort to salvage failed policies designed to preserve the status quo. More than 60 percent of the American people have rejected the conclusions of the report, which casts on opposition and stop the reinstatement of imperialistic policies.
Marc Jellinek, Milton, Italy, junior is a member of Latin American Solidarity. Members of the group helped gather information for the column
The University Daily Kansan Editorial Board meets at 6:30 p.m. Sundays to discuss editorial policy of the paper.
Members of the board include: Michael Beck, columnist; Jim Bole, editorial assistant; Doug Cunningham, editor; Sara Kempin, editorial editor; Don Knox, managing editor; Margaret Safranek, columnist and Gary Smith, columnist.
The board invites students and members of University or local groups who want to discuss editorial concerns to attend a board meeting.
Arrangements can be made by calling the editorial editor.
A guide to post-winter car repairs
Yesterday, I was trying to come up with another torture as painful as the one I'm going through. Chinese water torture? The piercing scream of a woman who had just pledged a sorority? A weekend in Eudora?
No, nothing quite matches the agonizing torture of taking the car you love to the mechanic to be fixed. Especially when you are in Lawrence, away from home, and down the street. Who can you trust in this town?
I wouldn't be half as worried about my car if had taken auto shop class in high school. But I opted for band and can diagnose and repair a spare drum in no time flat.
When something goes wrong with my car, however, my feeble fix-it attempts usually do more harm than good. The problems usually start out with the engine deep within the mysterious recesses of the engine.
Clicking sounds usually don't bother me much, ever since I installed my stereo. A twist of the volume knob and the problem is fixed. A little more volume blocks out the whining, protesting noise from the speakers. Another twist easily screens out the sound of the exploding engine and effectively deafens me.
The advent of the self-serve gas pump has helped the car repair industry. In the olden days, the pump boy would say something about your clicking valves as soon as you drove up. You pulled the car into the service door and an hour and $200 later, it was fixed.
I've searched all around Lawrence for a good mechanic. One day, I went to seven different
Nowadays, I depend on the horrified stares and pointing fingers of pedestrians to tell me when I have a problem. Then, the tortuous drive to the mechanic begins.
The seven different solutions 1 was offered ranged from a $300 engine rebuild job to one
HARRY MALLIN
Staff Columnist
mechanic who told me not to do anything, "Just keep adding oil." I chose the latter and my car runs great, and doesn't drink much oil, either.
Before I ended up with that mechanic, I had been to many local garages.
I changed mechanics when they told me I needed a new whim-wham shaft that had to be shipped from Germany.
"Two hundred dollars should cover the freight," they said with a greasy grin.
Since then, I've learned how to tell the difference between Mr. Goodwrench and Mr.
Badbreath. Caveat emptor — let the buyer
beware;
1. A carpeted garage area. If the mechanic can afford carpet, he's probably charging $150 for an
2. Clean garages or mechanics with clean hands.
A sure sign of a good garage is one where you can walk in and out without touching anything and still end up with fiddy hands.
3. Lots of young guys. They will usually listen to their stereo and run down your battery while they fix your car. They'll even leave a few cigarette packs in their car, they're re also learning about auto repair on your car
4. Fast service. Usually means that you're the only sucker in Lawrence who gets his car fixed
5. The junk table. A good garage has a well-stocked and completely unorganized junk table. It should have enough parts to construct a minimum of three engines.
6. Certificates on the wall. Some of the worst service I've ever received was from a "Certified Technician." Car repair is an art, not a piece of paper.
7. Good handwriting. Mechanics are like doctors and lawyers. You shouldn't be able to read them.
With all that in mind, welcome the season of post-winter car repairs knowing that you have the answers right here. Keep it in your glove compartment for handy reference.
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR
Art's role in life
To the editor:
In response to Barbara Paris' letter concerning the "Salina Piece" and modern art in general (University Daily Kansan, Feb. 24, 1984), I would first like to point out the apparent misunderstanding she has concerning art and its role in society.
Art, for the most part, does not dictate society, but instead serves as
a reflection of the society in which it is produced. So rather than blaming the artwork, or even the artist, instead blame 20th Century art attempts to reflect and represent.
1
Concerning the skill and craftsmanship involved in producing works such as "Salina Piece," in which she draws on her experience much more than first meets the eye.
It is ultimately the final product that matters. And for some people, there is significance, if not always beauty, to be found in modern works
The amount of time involved in producing an artwork, however, is not the real issue.
and City Hall, as well as "Salina Piece."
Without doubt, it certainly entailed more than an afternoon's doodling to create the sculptures in front of the Spencer Museum of Art
With few exceptions, all significant artistic movements in the past 100 years have initially met with resistance. It is only time which can
change people's attitudes and opinions. And time is the only true test of a work's artistic merit.
In many cases, 50 years or more pass before the public accepts a work which differs radically from their preconceived ideas of what art
So perhaps it would be wise to withhold judgment on such a recent work as "Salina Piece." In 50 years, who knows what may constitute art?
Steven Marker
Topeka junior