UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN editorials
Unsigned editorials represent the opinion of the Kansan editorial staff. Signed columns represent the views of only the writers.
OCTOBER 2,1978
Gumption on gasohol
While President Jimmy Carter's energy bill remains bogged in the Congressional swamps, a few Midwestern farmers have decided to take part of the problem in their own hands.
The farmers, members of the American Agri-Fuels corporation, decided last week to build a $20 million gasolol plant at one of four sites in Missouri. The use of gasolol, a grain alcohol gasoline additive, would cut gasoline consumption and create another market for grain farmers.
The novel thing about the decision to build the plant is that the farmers decided to build it without any government funding.
IN AN AGE when the federal government seems to be getting its funding fingers into everything from abortions to frisbee aerodynamics studies, this is an encouraging sign.
Even though it rarely makes the headlines these days, the energy shortage remains a serious problem. But after the crisis came to light almost six years ago, little has been done to ease the crunch.
In addition, depressed farm prices, caused mainly by huge grain surpluses, brought groups of angry farmers to the nation's capital last spring in protest.
But the proposed gasohol plant would help the energy and farm price problems in a single move, without any money or advice from the federal government.
WHEN IT is fully operational, the proposed plant would produce 60,000 gallons of gasolon a day at a cost of about 70 cents a gallon.
This may seem a little expensive for a gallon of gas today, but with ever increasing prices it soon won't raise an everbrow.
Gasohol mixed at a 1-to-9 ratio with gasoline makes cars perform better, cleaner, and even gets one a few more miles at tankfull.
It is sad that an energy alternative with the advantages of gasohol goes completely unfunded by the government, while nuclear energy development, with all its evils, gets millions a year.
But at least it's heartening to know some Midwestern farmers have enough drive and ingenuity to develop their own solution to the energy problem.
Full financial disclosure necessary in campaign
The issue is not Mrs. Kassebau's wealth. The issue is openness and disclosure of personal interest in order to avoid conflict of interest as a senator.
In reference to your editorial on September 26, "Dollars Cloulding Issues," perhaps Bill Roy's position needs to be more clearly stated.
Nancy Kass 'mm's financial statement is an important tool in her race against Bill Clinton.
Also of legitimate interest to Kansas taxpayers is the question of whether Mrs. Kassbaum is paying her fair share of federal income taxes. If she is not, the lower and middle income taxpayers have to make up the difference.
To the editor:
kassebunen's partial disclosure omitted several key factors: (1) her total gross income, (2) source of her income and (3) the exact amount of federal income tax paid.
He made full and complete financial disclosure several weeks ago because he felt that the public has a right to know the nature and extent of his financial interests.
Toni Wood Cherryvale junior
To the editor:
I would like to respond to Myron Kayton's article, "U.S. Must Rescue Its Technology," Sept. 26. Kayton not only lacks a humanistic outlook but also does not real reefslings into the future. He is all too typical of persons wanting to view the world in strictly material and economic terms of the present. For some reason he chooses to live among people whoDie lives in both the present and future.
California, the state that sent the rest of the country into an anti-tax frenzy with Proposition 13 in August, now has something else for the nation: Proposition 5.
If the United States is to continue to develop high technology at the present rate, ever increasing amounts of natural resources will be needed by persons involved in high technology today. Kayton refuses to face the inevitable reality that our natural resources are finite. Are we to believe that this highly prized technology is going to create 'new' resource?
Technology column lacked realistic view
Absusive and irreparable exploitation of the environment is an inevitable by-product of high technology. This technology is based upon the availability of massive amounts of natural resources at low prices. Without this, high technology is not economical. In order to obtain these large amounts at low capital levels, emphasis should be placed on mass, while waste, disruption and impoverishment are accepted "costs."
It is quite evident to most that his high technology is the most wasteful system of production ever introduced onto this planet. He presents high technology as a boon when in fact it is a boondoggle. Not only does Keyton hold an unrealistic view of our planet, but he also fails to realize the real issues of exploitation that exist below the surface of his arguments.
Because of this, environmental exploitation is inevitable. How are we presently obtaining our much needed water in the face of the rage of the earth. We see less of this going on in our own country, primarily because many of the resources have already been taken for water to take place in the Third World developing nations. There it is well out of sight of those
Proposition 5 is an exercise in popular democracy that reads like a law school text. But behind all the complex verbiage lies an unmistakable and insidious attempt to make life unfeasible for the 8 million or so Californiaians who smoke.
Proposal is tyrannv for smokers
The new law, if approved by California voters Nov. 7, would virtually declare smoking to be an antisocial act. In its extremism, it is characteristically Califor-
THE PROPOSITION goes beyond the near-total bans on smoking in public places that have been enacted in Utah and Minnesota. If it wins, California cabbies could no longer smoke with fare in the car, restaurants would be required to set up non-smoking sections and workplaces would be partitioned for smokers and non-smokers.
are not respected. But this becomes dangerous territory because no one's rights can be guaranteed if someone's can be violated.
The exploitation of resources in other countries by high technology industries leads us to the other fault that lies in Kayton's arguments. Simply, he does not concern himself with the necessary external effects and the production of high technology goods.
About the only places a smoker could feel safe to pursue his antisocial pleasure without fear of violating the law are private bedrooms and rooms in hotels, motels and dormitories.
Today people are forced off their lands in Australia in order to mine uranium to fuel our highly technological nuclear plant. People in South Africa who mine necessary ore for our consumption live poverty stricken and we rely on American companies. People throughout Central America are kept at a peasant status in order that the prices remain low for our coffee, bananas, and pineapples. In our own country, the Native Americans continue to be exploited by the federal government in order about their land from mining to lumber.
Americans who find it offensive in their own backyards.
The line of thought reflected by Kayton's statement that 10 percent of the federal welfare budget should be taken away from developers is not given to the developers of high technology, is not only mindless, it is outrageous. Does Kayton really wish to see people freeze in their homes because they do not have the technology they need in price because of the continually expanding consumption by the high technology industries? Perhaps Kayton proposes to feed starving people on a steady basis to computers, video recorders and satellites.
MANY UNOPUPOLAR LARGES have borne the brunt of tyranny because no one would stand up for them. They should not be left to face the wolves alone. Let all smokers—no matter how odious, no matter how vulgar, no matter how insane—know that they have at least one defender.
Of course, no one would tolerate Proposition 5-type tyranny against anyone but the smoker. the arch friend of the 1970s. The attacker could be a bide him; he has the social appeal of a leper.
The law has its subtle bias. It seems to rest on the assumption that smoking reflects a taste for the vulgar. Smoking is, therefore, allowed at rock concerts, professional
One no came to his defense when Joseph Califano, the secretary of health, education and welfare, brought the moral and fiscal weight of the federal government crashing down on him by announcing a vigorous and aggressive government anti-smoking campaign.
And here in Kansas a proposal has been made to add three cents to the cost of a pack of cigarettes to help finance athletics programs at state universities.
Kayton, and all others who so readily accept his line of thought, should wake up to the reality of a human and humane world. Someday perhaps, they will recognize the inherent value of humans that so outweighs the value of their steel and plastic devices.
My concern and frustration with the amount of nursing care I could provide because of the inadequate staffing had led to a bad decision my only decision to seek employment elsewhere.
Graduating with a B.S. in nursing from KU, I have worked at the Med Center in NY and elsewhere. In my concern to me and not mentioned in the article is the fact that the high rate of turnover in nursing personnel creates a risk for poor patient care which contributes the quality of care patients receive there.
In any community there are probably many personal habits that displease a majority. A community of traditionalists, for example, might find the excesses of rock music to banish electric guitar and car radios from their jurisdiction?
Bill Beems
Kansans real losers from nurse turnover To the editor:
In regard to your article Sept. 22 about the Medical Center nurses' battle with bad pay and hours, I would like to make a further comment.
Lawrence senior
So light up. one of the tenants of the times is that miniaturizes have rights. Be testy. And if that freedom-hating next to you that sour look again, blow smoke in his face.
Unless the state legislature acts to make changes in the pay schedule I am sure this cycle of turnover will continue. And, sadly, it is the citizens of Kansas who shall not receive the quality of care they are entitled to at a state institution.
YOU BET they would under the logic of Proposition 5. Any behavior found to be offensive to enough people can be prohibited in a community where the individual rights
Come Henderson Kansas City, Kan., graduate student
Connie Henderson
Rick Alm
boxing and wrestling matches and roller derbies, but prohibited at amateur boxing matches, hockey games and jazz and classics in the hall. Must if all events were
Not great stuff. But the tobacco companies do have reason to be concerned about the consequences of their transactions. Proposition 5 has won enough support to be a threat. Supporters gathered 600,000 signatures to place the initiative on the ballot and one poll indicated 38 percent
Proposition 5, which would be a local issue in Maine or New Mexico, has taken on national significance because of California's reputation for being first with everything—suburbia, topless bars, student protests, tax revolts.
ERRANT SMOKERS would not face arrest. A small comfort, since smoking at police headquarters would be illegal. The ban would be enforced like traffic regulations, with a ticket. The mandatory fine for elicit smoking would be $50.
Proposition 5 has tobacco manufacturers worried enough to cough up as much as $85 million for an advertising blitz against it. One of their television ads shows a Lou Grant-type character whose newsroom is being partitioned to protect non-smokers.
If but smoking is a bad habit, Proposition 5 is, without question, a bad law. It recalls an erase when blue laws prohibited women from drinking or wearing a woman's skirt, outlawed liquor, required attendance at church or in any other way allowed a self-righteous majority to determine the legality of a liquor law.
NO ONE can say smoking is not an annoying habit. A survey found that even 90 percent of its practitioners want to quit. It seems that at best, unpleasant for those caught near it.
"Is this any way to run a newspaper," he sputters.
Camp David is only a beginning
N. Y. Times Feature
By MORRIS B. ABRAM
NEW YORK-The two Israeli-Egyptian agreements initiated at Camp David on Sept. 17, 1978, will, if implemented, stop the slide towards a new war in the Middle East. However, unless other Arab states openly join President Sadat's initiative, the Camp David summit cannot produce a comprehensive peace.
INDEED THE RIGHTS to bargain with respect to the West Bank had been ceded to the Palestinian Liberation Organization at Ramat Jawai in 1974. It clearly would not be granted to Israel, or would it be his penalty. King Hussein of Jordan, upon whom the Security Council resolution had placed a duty to bargain for the West Bank and Gaza, held back. Curiously, but probably because it was not politically wise or safe to bargain the obstacles in his path, Sadat stalked out of the conference.
The American umbrella sheltered the two states desiring peace from obstructionist tactics by the radical Arabs. Egypt and Israel may now be able to move toward a peace which President Carter noted would be the first between a Jewish nation and Egypt in more than 2,000 years. This is no mean achievement.
In the first days of negotiations with Sadat at Imamia, Begin showed his almost impetuous eagerness to return the entire Sinai in exchange for peace to a ruler possessed of the power and disposition to make the trade. But Begin appeared grudging, in not insistent, when Sadat asked for aid from Wall Bank territories over which Sadat had no control.
It constitutes the first recognition by a principal Arab state since the 8th century of the legitimacy of a non-Moslem sovereignty from the Dardanelles to the Atlas Mountains. This first step, a peace with Egypt, was followed by a more influential and populous Arab state from the circle of enemies that has forced four wars on Israel in 30 years.
Yet the stubborn facts persist: President Anwar Sadat could not negotiate a definitive agreement except concerning territories over which Egypt claims sovereignty. Indeed, his attempts to do this since his historic visit to Jerusalem in November 1977 have caused all subsequent Israeli negotiation before the summit to flounder.
The problem fostered for almost eight months. Sadat tried to bohemian Begin into an agreement about the West
Prime Minister Menachem Begin's failure to make clear until now that he could not negotiate details over the West Bank except with Jordan, as United Nations Security Council's Resolution 242 provides, places unwarranted blame on Israel for the breakdown of negotiations commenced at Israillia.
GRAVE PROBLEMS remain to be resolved, but they may yield a momentum and a change of chemistry that is not clearly apparent.
Bank approximating Begin's trade with him on Sinai.
Bein must have asked:
- **{whom shall I sign 1?** What security will I get?
- **safe and secure boundaries rest?** What about
    security?
SADAT, FOR HIS part, could make demands, but could give no assurances.
Of course, neither Sadat, King Hussein, the Saudis or the Syrians could tolerate an independent PLO state in the heart of this oil-rich and strategic area. But those who rule Syria are all trapped with their own rhetoric and hypocrisy.
Sadat has finally and bravely faced reality. He knows that the only world power with which the area can live is the United States. Egypt had a trial marriage with the Soviets. It was a disaster.
It was a disaster.
The Saudis, sitting in unprotarian splendor on top of their oil domes, know that Soviet-PLO power means confiscation and possible execution. King Hussein knows the game.
In the final analysis, as long as the destruction of Israel was unthinkable to the United States, Sadah saw no route to peace in the Middle East except through Washington. President Carter knows that Washington is beaded by the press that he wisely made the patriotic defense of Catoctin Mountains, hence, the parley at Camp David.
WILL IT ALL work out? It will if Begin and Sadat survive politically and physically; if King Hussein will take the personal risks that match his considerable political skills; if the Saudis see that an Arab Jerusalem is not worth their thrones and if the Arab mind can focus on the future and forget the lamentations of a bitter history.
Camp David is a beginning. However, even if a comprehensive peace with all the neighboring Arab states cannot be achieved except with time, at least war has been possible under future the Egyptian-Israeli pact at Camp David.
Morris B. Abram is the honorary president of the American Jewish Committee and former president of Brandslund University. He is a partner in the law firm of Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton & Garrison. This article ran in the National Law Journal.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May and Monday through Thursday during June and July except Saturday, and Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, Kansas 60001. Subscriptions by mail are $15 for six months, while online subscriptions are $39. County: Student subscriptions are $2 a semester, and the student activity fee.
Managing Editor Jerry Sass
Editor Steve Fraterk
Editorial Editor Berry Masser
Campus Editor
Associate Campus Editor
Magazine Editor
Associate Magazine Editor
Sports Editor
Associate Sports Editor
Photo Editor
Copy Chefs
Business Manager Don Green
Associate Business Manager
Assistant Business Manager
Associate Management Manager
Associate Promotion Managers
Advertising Manager National Advertising Manager Chassised Manager Assistant Classified Manager Photographer
General Manager Rick Mussel
Don Bowerman
Brian Settle Pam Manson
Maddison
Mary-Anne Olivar
Leon Urunh
Nelson Pennard
Randy Glen
Laurie Daniels Carol Hunter
Paula Scotlander
Karen Wendroff
Bret Miller
New York
Mel Smith
Alain Blair Whitman-Ike Kang
Greg Munner
Katherine Ann Hendricks
Bob Hart
Advertising Advisor Chuck Chowna