4
Tuesday, October 24, 1972
University Daily Kansan
KANSAN
comment
Kansas 'Youth Drain' Poses Several Questions
Kansas politicians and community leaders are concerned about the so-called "youth drain" from the state. They wonder why the young leave to seek fame and fortune elsewhere when this state is noted for its clean environment, wide open spaces and low crime rates. Their questions are valid and need answering if the state is to progress. Unfortunately, many of these leaders continue to search for the answers in the wrong places. A little self-inspection may be in order.
To begin with, this is an election year. If the state's leaders are sincere in their efforts to reverse the flow of young people from the state, then they should begin seeking out the opinions of the young people who are still in the state. The politicians' worn-out platitudes must be discarded in favor of new action-oriented programs in the areas of education, recreation and career opportunities in Kansas.
For example, the state legislature continues to wield a sharp knife when it is time to fund educational programs. Budget cuts and salary freezes are necessary, they contend, because the taxpayer is overburdened. Indeed the taxpayer is, but what prevents the state from seeking out new sources of revenue? There are unlimited possibilities for revenue if some of our leaders would only confront the "said cows" that provide so much milk for their campaign coffers.
Why, for example, is there a continued reluctance on the part of our legislators to support liquor by the drink? There are few young people, if any, who seriously believe that liquor by the drink is a tool of the devil. Most young people are more concerned with the drug crisis and its impact on their lives. They also place great emphasis on the quality of educational programs. They know that combating the drug problem and maintaining quality academic standards cost a great deal of money, especially when our state treasury is as overburdened
with requests as the beleaguered taxayer.
But the young people can't understand why liquor by the drink has not been legislated when it would serve to generate the needed revenue for education, welfare and social programs. Could it be that although liquor by the drink won't signal a decline in moral standards, it might signal a decline in the power of the retail liquor lobby in Topeka? Power has a tendency to dull the senses as much as liquor.
And what about the questions of career opportunities and recreational facilities which are so important to young people? How can Kansans expect their young people to remain in the state when there are no jobs to be found? More importantly, how can state leaders encourage the remaining in the state when these leaders refuse to plan for recreational areas but seem anxious to build more industrial plants?
During the last session of the legislature, the leaders ignored a proposal to create a recreational complex near one of the state lakes. Yet the lieutenant governor was touring the state during the primaries, stressing the need to increase industry, he argued, would create more jobs, more revenue and more leisure time for the taxnaver.
Presumably, we were to believe that heavy industry, with its tax-free, public-financed construction bonds, would generate more jobs, more state revenue and more leisure activity than would a recreational, service-oriented development on the banks of Lake Perry. There seems to be fishier goings-on in the legislature than in the lake.
If the leaders in Kansas want the young people to remain in the state, then they should begin to listen to them. If the young people in the state want to be heard, then they should seek out their leaders. Then perhaps the drain will be "back to Kansas" and not "out of Kansas."
—Mark Bedner
Name Change Rule Acts to Limit Rights
When it was publicized that people who changed their names through marriage, divorce or some other legal proceeding during the few weeks between registering to vote and an election day could not vote, the reaction varied from outrage to amazement that such a law existed.
The number of people who would change their names within a few weeks is probably too small to make that group politically significant. The purpose of the law seems to be to expedite bookkeeping and to prevent anyone from voting under both names.
It is deplorable that the rights of a person would be sacrificed to bookkeeping. The rationale that someone might take advantage of both names and vote twice is weak. The number of people who would do that would be so small that they could not possibly have any influence on any election except in the smallest towns. In those towns a woman's (a change of name is much more likely to happen to a woman than to a man) marriage or divorce would probably be known, and it would be unlikely that she could take advantage of the recent change.
This law seems to be more concerned with the misuse of a right protected by the laws and need of protecting and insuring an individual's right it looks at an individual's ability to misuse the right. It does not follow the often quoted ideal of our law courts that a person is innocent until proven guilty. It is unfortunate that our legislators would enact a law which indicates that they expect a misuse of the right to vote from their constituents.
It is particularly annoying that our state representatives would choose to deny a recently married or divorced woman her right to vote simply because of her new name when there are other ways to assure that a person only once it might be some sort of unit registration clerk's time, but a newly named voter should be able to expect that from the county office.
The constitution gives all people over the age of eighteen the right to vote. It says nothing about limiting that right when it might be inconvenient to government bookkeepers. The law indicates a sad ordering of priorities in the legislature in regards to individual rights. It is time that Kansans begin to be aware of the kinds of laws this state has and the kinds of laws that have made Vern Miller is probably one of the best things that has happened to this state. By enforcing all of the laws he can be the catalyst for getting some of them off the books.
Mary Ward
Garry Wills
Our Insensitivity Explored
There is a Sky Is Falling school of journalists at work on this Administration's scandals. Writers are disturbed that Doom does not get disburced enough when Doom impends over Watergate.
thehey of Grant's administration did not turn Republicans out of office; neither did Teapot Dome. In fact, I don't know of a single presidential election that was lost because of personal scandal connected with an incumbent.
Their concern is understandable. It is not pleasant to think our rorks are crooks, or at least investigators trace rat droppings into and out of the White House. The rats can hardly come as a surprise.
MegGovern says our moral insensitivity is of recent growth—it is Richard Nixon's fault. But Mr. Obama has not scandal from our origins. The
The public attitude seems to be that every regime will have a certain amount of graft and bank-panky. And politicians will be seen as spectacles. Truman had his Five-Percenters and fur coat; Eisenhower changed the coat's material to vicuna, and added a fireproof shell to Baker and Walter Jenkins. Even a "reform" administration like
Murray Lindsay's in New York is scandal-riden. And some of those doing Chicken Little's act at all about Chappaquiddick.
Is it cynical to say these things? Perhaps. Still, I do care that Americans do not care. This bothers me very much—but in areas that dwarf the Watergate that would mind bombing defenseless civilians, killing them by thousands, is an obscurity. The man who strenuously tsk-tks over partisan venalities, after being labeled a conspirator. If even the worst charges prove true about Nixon's shady cadre of
fingailers and forgers and evil clowns, all their efforts added up just an amount to petty crime when it confronts our war responsibilities.
Or take the record of this Administration's attempts to "get" people it considered public nuisances. Framing a case to 'cover' for J. Edgar Hover, the deputy deprives priests and nuns of their freedom, to put them in jail for life. After that, efforts to deprive McGovern of an election look small indifferently, and I don't recall, but matter a lot." Google" saying anything in this campaign about the Berrigans.
No, McGovern has endorsed a man legally charged with involvement in the liquidation of troublesome Panthers by police phone-tappers. One side pays phone-tappers, the other lays bachy law. Is it any wonder the public yawns at both sides' labors of outrage? The brother-in-law of Chappaquajck's best friend just cannot get over the effect of breaking and entering out of obsure lust to read the collected missives of Larry O'Brien. Both sides boo-hoo over trivialities from a whole country shapeless. Aren't politicians funny?
(C) 1972, Universal Press Syndicate
Jack Anderson
Perot Given Special Treatment
WASHINGTON—H. Ross Perot, the likable, logoucious Texas millionaire who has bankrolled many of President Nixon's favorite projects, has been given a fortune in Medicare and other contracts over the strenuous objections of Social Security experts.
In one case, the Nixon Administration overruled Social Security, which handles medicare, at the very time in 1969 when Perot was cranking up to back President Nixon's Vietnam policy with national newspaper ads.
Only a few months to serve Perot had agreed to serve with other well-known moneybags as a trustee on the Richard Nixon which will fund a library and museum for the Nixon papers.
Earlier, Perot had personally paid the salaries of six employees of his Electronic Data Systems while they were on leave of absence to work on the 1968 Nixon presidential campaign.
Again, in 1971, Perot's good works for Nixon coincided with administration approval of a contract to time, contract approval in five states had been held up by Social Security for more than a year. Some experts at Social Security suggested that be allowed to go through at all.
The undersecretary, through a spokesman, said these were not
But the log jam broke within a week after Peret decided to pour $64 million into a failing Wall Street firm at the personal request of then-Attorney General John Mitchell, White House aide
Peter Flanigan and other high administration persuaders.
The White House wanted to save investors from disaster but the failure of the Wall Street firm, duPont Glores Goran, also embarrassed by President Nixon. One of the merged firms making up duPont Glores was formerly headed by Maurice Stans, Nixon's commerce chief campaign fund raiser.
Hundreds of pages of public records in the two cases, while they do not show any direct tie with Perot's pro-Nixon gestures, that the Perot got special treatment from the administration.
When Nixon came to office in January, 1969, Perot was under fire for what one Social Security expert estimated was more than 100 per cent profits on his Texas bill. The Perot says it was only 14 per cent.
After careful study, Social Security finally said in June that it wasn't going to fully reimburse Texas Blue Shield on the Perot contract demands. Blue Shield took the case directly to Health, Medicine and Welfare Understretcher John Veneman's office.
Perot met personally with Veneman. Although neither is sure exactly when that was, Perot told us twice that there was no recalls, and the recalls contracts were discussed during their private meeting.
In October, 1969, four months after Social Security had turned down Perot, Venoman made the mistake of giving Perot the payments he wanted.
Texas contracts, but a proposed California contract that was turned down. Whatever the truth, Veneman's office took over leadership of the Texas case from Social Security.
This is the testimony of Social Security Health Insurance chief Thomas Tierney. Tierney also told a top aide, Dr. Thomas Bell, that "the HEW decision is to go with Ross Perot."
Veneman's own hand-picked aide on the deal, James McLane, now deputy director of the Cost of Living Council, also affirms that he made the recommendation to provide it. Veneman dislikes this.
In any case, even as Perot was getting his way on Texas, he was looking to new contract payments in the Northeast, in Kentucky, in Kentucky, New York and Minnesota.
Again, there was strong opposition within Social Security. But a breeze of 15 months on the NSA and an increase suddenly on March 27, 1971—six days after Perot salvaged the Wall Street firm for the administration. The other four officials approved by Social Security.
Perot, in two long impassioned talks with my associate Les Whiten, insisted that the contracts had nothing to do with his use of dufton Glore, Hispanic victims, or other pro-Nixon actions.
By Sokoloff
Griff and the Unicorn
"I have done no favors for President Nixon," said Perot. "The things that I have done regarding the prisoners of war and regarding the investment in Wall Street were done without regard to who was president. I was not president, as a matter of conscience had Senator Humphrey been president."
Clarence J. Brown, who was elected lieutenant governor in 1919 at age 25, wound up in Congress for 27 years. When he died in 1863 he was succeeded by Clarence J. Brown, Jr.
Former Postmaster General Walter F. Brown, ex-Secretary of State Thad Brown and ex-Judge James O'Brien are still political powers in Ohio.
Now Justice Lloyd Brown is running for re-election to the Ohio Supreme Court. His opponents: B. Brown and William B. Brown.
On the contrary, he said, in Milwaukee, California and Washington, D.C., he was treated unfairly on contracts. Where he succeeded, he said earnestly, it was because Electronic Data Systems did a better job at a cheaper rate.
Ohio citizens have been voting for Brown since they elected Ethan Allen Brown to the statehouse back in 1818. Today, Ohio politics is positively teeming with Brown's. Is it true that he signed a law to attorneys and his first try for elected office in 1970, is now state attorney general. Lieutenant Governor John W. Brown was a state highway patrolman when he started working in part to help him thank thanks in part to his name has served continuously as secretary of state since 1950.
Footnote: Rep. L. H. Fountain, D-N.C., has been digging into Pero's contracts for Medicare under the governmental Relations Subcommittee is quietly drawing up a report in 1973.
Once again on Nov. 7th, 21nths of Americans will scan their ballots and place their marks beside the old familiar names. The names Long in Louisiana or Kennedy in Massachusetts or Brown in Ohio are worth thousands of votes.
Copyright, 1972 by United Feature Syndicate, Inc
Universal Press Syndicate 1977
Kansan Telephone Numbers
Newroom—UN-4 4810
Business Office—UN-4 4538
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN America's Pacemaking college newspaper
Published at the University of Kansas daily during the academic year except holidays and examination periods. Mail subscription rates @ $1 a semester, $1 a year. Second class postage paid at Lawrence, Kans., 60442, with regard to color, creed, or religion. Ontario expresses are not necessarily those of the University of Kansas at the State Board of Regents.
NEWSSTAFF
Editor
Campaign Editor
News Editors
Court Clerk
Assistant Campus Editors
Chief Editor
Feature Editors
Business Editor
Wire Editors
Review Editor
Postscript Editor
Researcher
New York Times
Spider Spear
Jane Scalia
Randall Becker
Sally Carney
Glenn Mickel, Marilyn Stewart
Alan Kopp, Barbara
Dan George
Nancy Jones
Tom Slightner, Mary Ward, Robert Want, Mark Benhee
Heather Gurney
Huey Jones
Steve Reilly
Jeff Zakata
Joe Coleman, Prits Branded,
Linda Carpent
David Schmidt
BUSINESS STAFF
Business Adviser... Mel Adams
Business Manager Advertising Manager Associate Advertising Manager National Advertising Manager Foreign Market Manager Classified Advertising Manager
Data Pieces Managers Nick Newick Mike Wheeler John Locke Jeanne Smith John Larkin John Larkin