Page 2
---
(2) $x = 0$ is a solution to the equation $3x^2 - 4x + 1 = 0$.
University Daily Kansan Monday. April 21, 1958
Go To Work Vox
The election—even the shouting—is all over now, so perhaps it's time to take stock of what has been accomplished.
Thanks to a sweeping victory, Vox party and its candidates are now in the driver's seat in the All Student Council. And the AGI, the "ins" who were tossed out, are picking up the pieces after taking a pretty sound trouncing at the polls.
The biggest victory of the election, however, went to the aroused voter. He carried the day Almost 3.000 students—perhaps a record turnout-voted last Wednesday.
If the election proved anything, it was that campus politicians play with fire when they try to pull shenanigans in the ASC. The election was a dandy object lesson to those who say the student voter doesn't know and therefore doesn't care about what goes on in his Council. The voters punched all sorts of holes in that argument last Wednesday.
1. Eliminate all closed meetings.
2. Amend the ASC constitution to allow students without ASC experience to run for the
Vox party leaders have promised to make the following changes in ASC administration:
offices of student body president and vice-president.
3. Make Council committee appointments according to merit, making sure that appointments are evenly apportioned among organized houses and independents.
With these changes needed, there is work cut out for the new Council. We leave it to Vox now, to perform as promised. The party and its leaders have a good year ahead of them if they will provide sound, efficient student government.
But in parting, we'll leave Vox with some sobering thoughts. Right now AGI partisans are probably mustering their scattered opposition forces. They'll be back strong next year; we hope with a better program than that turned down by the voters this year.
The students will be waiting for constructive Council action.
And finally, The Daily Kansan, bless its cantankerous old soul, will be watching every move the new administration makes.
It takes so very little effort to be honest in government. But one phony move in the Council, one bit of Hanky Panky, and we'll belt the daylights out of 'em. —The Editors
The Student Court
If you've gotten a traffic ticket and you're pretty sure you didn't deserve one, appeal your case to the Student Court. The procedure is simple. Let's say that you have been given a traffic ticket for over-parking in a 30-minute zone, when in actuality your car had been there for only 20 minutes.
Take your ticket to the traffic office in Robinson Gymnasium. There you may fill out an appeal blank. Later you will receive, through the mail, a notice telling you when you are to appear before the court and the name of your defense attorney. It is important that you call your defense attorney a few days before you are to appear so that he will have time to prepare your case.
The Student Court is provided as a service to the students. Its purpose is not to belittle or embarrass the students who appeal their cases. A police officer is only human and as capable of making mistakes as any individual. In case of error the only recourse for the student is to appeal. This is his right.
The Student Court, we feel, is one of the worthwhile institutions on campus since the officials and the attorneys are law students receiving valuable court experience. To increase its service to the students, we would make the following suggestions:
1. Any student who feels that he has unjustly received a traffic ticket should appeal his case.
2. Perhaps there could be several places on campus where a student could fill out an appeal blank. The traffic office is not always convenient for students. The Student Union might be an appropriate place for such an office.
3. The court meets only once a month. It is already over-worked. If there could be two courts which would meet once a month, student convenience would be enhanced.
Evelyn Hall
. Letters To The Editor
Editor:
After reading the editorial pages in Monday and Tuesday's Kansans, I wondered if the Kansan editors who wrote them differentiated between "taking an editorial stand" and cramming their opinions down the throats of their readers.
I think it is important for editorial writers to come to decisions about the issues that confront them and their readers. Decisions have to be made about many issues and the editorial page can often lead readers to a definite pattern of action through the lucid reasoned expression of opinions.
But this calls for a page of reason
not a vehicle of emotion. To be really valuable, I believe the editors should state the process of thinking that led to the decision expressed in it. The reader should have all the facts that can be printed which led the editors to make their decision. To give them less than this is to imply that the editors are beyond that fallibility inherent in human nature.
The editorial in Monday's Kansan gave just that impression. It presented the qualifications of the candidates of only one party and did not give the reader the materials with which to make up his own mind. The argument that the qualifications of other candidates had already been printed is hardly valid if the true purpose of the editorial page was to aid the reader. A real service would have been to put all the qualifications right before him, because as the editors knew, few readers would take time to dig up old Kansans to search for them.
The whole tone of the paper's Monday and Tuesday editorial page is one of bias and rabid parisianism which serves to discredit in the eyes of many readers who look for calm analysis in seeking to form their opinions.
Tuesday's editorial page carried at least one misstatement of fact. Watkins Hall came into Vox long before the Little Hoover committee report, near the beginning of school. As a resident of Watkins I can state that dissatisfaction with our representation in AGI was a very small consideration if one at all. Apparently the editors conjured these statements from what appeared a probability.
Lighter Side of Congress
As a member of Vox I suppose I should have appreciated those power packed editorial pages of last week. But as a journalism student they turned my stomach.
And already they have run into a distressing problem.
Our lawmakers, fresh from spring junkets to assorted military bases, race tracks, allied nations, southern beaches and other such mundane locations, this week got their much-heralded investigation of space underway, though not to say off the ground.
Where, they are demanding to know, is space? How high and how low does it go? Also, how far?
Chairman John W. McCormack (D-Mass), who does most of his travel to and from Boston, propounded the vexing question immediately after convening his 13-man select house committee on astronautics and space exploration for the first of what promises to be a stellar series of hearings.
Sad to say, he didn't get much of an answer.
McCormack's space explorers already have made one modest ascent. They emerged from their sub-basement offices and climbed four stories to conduct their hearings in the big caucus room on the third floor of the house office building.
Nancev Harmon.
Apparently, they won't get much higher than that immediately, despite their broad authorization. Dr. Wernher Von Braun, the Army rocket expert, told them certain regrettable technical difficulties still stand in the way of manned travel in space.
But this didn't deter the Congressional space men. Where, they kept demanding of Von Braun, is space?
Von Braun, who it was hoped knew all about such things, said disappointingly he couldn't rightly answer the question. He told McCormack space is pretty big. He said it's hard to nail down.
McCormack was willing to settle for this, at least temporarily, but not Rep. Overton Brooks (D-La). Brooks conceded space was sizeable, but said he thought it could be defined.
Brooks said the way he got it,
there is both inner and outer space.
He said the former, according to his
informants, covers everything up to
60,000 feet altitude, and the latter
everything further up, or out.
Von Braun was too polite, apparently, to say this wasn't altogether accurate. True or false, however, Brooks' definition didn't satisfy Rep. James G. Fulton (R-Fa), another of the space men. Fulton pressed Von Braun for something more specific.
Where, he demanded, should the space committee draw its own lines? The taxpayers, he said, demand limits, even on space. Von Braun pondered and said, well, maybe as a starter the committee might confine itself to. sav, just the solar system.
Fulton was dismayed. The people of Pittsburgh, it was plain, did not send Fulton to Congress to write off in such casual fashion all the rest—worse, all but this tiny fraction—of the universe.
Von Braun, smiling, tried once more.
Fulton said sternly this looked like a narrow view for a man like Von Braun, who, moments before, had urged the committee to take a "broad view" of its duties.
"Where does our field end?" he persisted. "What is the limit of our jurisdiction?"
"Just say," he suggested weakly, that the sky's the limit."
United Press
Daily Hansan
University of Kansas student newspaper
1904, rweekly 1908, daily Jan. 16, 1912.
Extension 251, news room
Extension 256, business office
Member Inland Daily Press Association.
Associated Collegiate Press. Represented by National Advertising Service, 420 Madison Ave., New York, N. Y. News service; United Press. Mail subscription rates: $3 a semester or $4.50 a year. Published in Lawrence, Kan. every after school. University year except Saturdays and Sundays. University holidays, and examination periods. Entered as second-class matter Sept. 17, 1910, at Lawrence. Kan. post office under act of March 3, 1879.