UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN editorials
Unsigned editors represent the opinion of the Kanans editor's staff. Signed columns represent the views of
October 12. 1979
Water laws dry state
Kansas is running out of water. It no secret to many Kansas that water resources are being used up more quickly than they can be replenished.
By the year 2000, a state study shows, usage could increase by nearly 50 percent more.
And the reasons for the near critical shortage are not secret. Water usage, spurred by a big increase in crop production, big doubled between 1965 and 1972.
Add to the jump in irrigation the pollution of much water and—worst of all—the lack of planning for the day of rain. The result is that shortages reach crisis proportions.
A GOVERNOR's task force on water resources revealed that lack of planning was perhaps the prime problem in the state's current water problems.
"We're headed for real trouble if we don't do something about allocating water rights and restricting usage," says Kansas House Speaker Wendell Lady. "Perhaps this has been left too long to people with vested interests and they are not able to look at the whole picture."
One state水 official said that for years local irrigation districts, farmers, state politicians and others thought that individuals should
BUT KANSAS can no longer afford such an individualistic approach.
Indeed, water management is so fragmented statewide—22,000 local governments in Kansas have water management responsibilities that there seems to be no way to make sure they are made aware of policy decisions are made and enforced.
CONSEQUENTLY, candidates now have to deal with those best-treated issues and tough opponents in their campaigns—and these laws could very easily determine if a candidate wins or loses his seat.
manage their own water and that the state should keep its hands off.
In an attempt to make the presidential and congressional elections more equitable, Republicans failed to make the public well-being, important federal campaign finance laws were passed by Congress
TO BEGIN WITH, the laws require periodic complete and accurate disclosures of financial statements of a campaign. During an election, these disclosures have to be made every month.
JUST HOW to do that seems to be the real question. A series of public hearings is being conducted in the state to try to solve the problem.
Now is the time for the governor or the legislature to devise a statewide water management program—or at the very least a supervisory program—to make sure that the water supply crisis does not bring about the economic havoc that now seems possible, if not probable.
Although the laws were in effect during the 1976 presidential election, confusion and legal squabbles overshadowed their importance and function. But with the passing of three years, the bugs have been shaken out and the Republican Election Commission—or so it is hoped.
Finance laws reveal presidential qualities
Lack of attention has been the key phrase to describe state water management. But as water runs short, so does the time to correct the shortage. Controls are needed now more than ever.
The laws allow for federal matching of funds raised by a candidate who chooses to run his campaign under the guidelines of these laws. The candidate who chooses to raise all the money himself, however, is not allowed of the strict provisions in these laws.
This is important because the public can obtain information about fund contributors and if there are any ably connections between them. The laws also set limitations to the amount an individual can contribute to a fund against the misuse of funds—consequently limiting the possibilities that a candidate may have.
It appears as if candidates running for the presidency are willing to accept the burdens of these laws to receive federal funds to support the program, especially in these times of inflation.
Gov. John Carlin says he prefers to let local water management take that responsibility. But leadership must be provided to ensure cooperation among groups involved in water policy decisions in the state.
In fact, those who originally pushed for the campaign finance laws saw their effects as going beyond the campaign. Successful
These laws, which restrict spending for state primaries, require disclosure of campaign materials and provide funding on its types of contributions and provide for federal funds, are important for several reasons.
John COLUMNIST fischer
political candidates serve as public of-
fice that they artificially argue, would be less
likely to win in a primary, or grouped
groups and political action committees if
they were less dependent on them from the
But the new laws' most visible effect is in the way they affect candidates, campaign offices and state primaries that odds between candidates so that no one candidate has a clear advantage over another. For example, the laws have restrictions on how a primary election is allowed to spend on state primaries.
THIS, AS well as contribution guidelines and federal funding reduces the possibility of a wealthy candidate "buying" his way through large advertising expenditures.
Consequently, because all the candidates have about the same budget to work from, it is not appropriate for them to determine his success or failure—and this calls for intelligence and strategy and not mere experience.
Important decisions have to be made by the candidate concerning what primaries he will enter and how much he will stand on them. It is important having an important impact on his government.
IF THE CANDIDATE spends too much money on the early primaries, he could be out of money for crucial races down the road. But on the other hand, if he doesn't spend too much early in the campaign, he could be out of cash before he starts to make his strong push.
Judgment and strategy, then, determine who will be the victor, and not necessarily those who have been made to the public's conceptions. And these are two important characteristics for a pre-trial judge.
These campaign laws are important to the nation because they safeguard important opportunities for citizens and help in helping themselves than the country, and because they are essential to our ideas of
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
KANSAN
because it is so easy to imagine him sitting in his Sacrament flat, listening to his Rastoncain tapes and trying to meditate on some popliteal mood, probably an issue for me.
US$14,900 published by the University of Kansas daily August through May and Monday during June, July and August and September days. Seventy-seven payable postage贴支付 for a monthly subscription to US$2,750 or a Douglas County and US$4 for six months or US$6 year outside the Douglas County. Market information and a student activity fee are addressed by the University of Kansas directly.
Some people will listen to him, and a few college students will work for him, and in many cases they will be unable. He will probably play a prominent if not overly important-role in the 1980s.
We haven't heard much from California Gov. Jerry Brown in recent months, and while we should be thankful for such a change, our time with the Zen-colored zonk-heel is here formalizing.
Instructor: Send changes to address to the University Daily Kusan. Print Hall. The University of Kansas, Lawrence KS59408
Editor Mary Beehk
Managing Editor Nancy December
Campus Editor Assistant Campus Editor Assistant Campus Editor
Assistant Managing Editor Sports Editor Associate Space Editor Copy Chief
Business Manager Cynthia Ray
Berkel Sales Manager National Sales Manager Classified Sales Manager Assistant Classified Manager Advertising Makeup Manager Staff Artist General Manager Rick Mauger
Editorial Editor Mary Erwin
Editorial Editor Mary Erwin
Tam Sheethy Tami Garcia Lori Garcia Bran Setteil Hilary Tiffin Tom Fitts Dana Mueller Tom Fitts Brett Schollman, Beverly Wilson
Vincent Coolem Carly Nelson Cashio Carlo Deun Trevelt Alfie Reynolds Keed Geoffler Advertising Advisor Chuck Chesson
HE HAS been there before. In 1976 he made a belated attempt to overtake Jimmy Carter, defeating him in five of the last six primaries. He drew a young president, and he easily-elected campaign in California, he seemed ready to push for the nomination again.
Whether he can sustain a campaign that can defeat Carter, the incumbent, or Kenyan President Obama, one thing is clear—what Brown has to offer the country is an ambling record of success.
He has tried to jump on bandwagons that would carry him into the spotlight and into the favor of special interest groups, disregarding whether they have liberal or conservative ideals. Using the word of the bandwagons he has worked with, he's "dangerous."
Brown picks issues to please all
Brown spent much of last year crussing for a constitutional amendment that would balance the federal budget. He was, in effect, clutching to the anti-tax law running through the country and acting accordingly to gain public acceptance.
HE DID, but only until the interest in the amendment died out and saner minds pointed out that the balanced budget would increase the American productivity or to encourage our stagnation. Brown quieted down even when it became clear that a constitutional amendment would tamper with our country's fundamental basis of law.
He still speaks of balancing the budget, but not with the frequency or conviction that he once did. He tries instead to demonstrate his own spending restraint by renting an apartment that is within walking distance of the college. Plymouth instead of the gubernatorial limousine and ordering all California bureaucats to buy their briefcases
In the same poll, 21 percent said they would vote for Brown, while 18 percent said they would vote for Carter. An overwhelming amount ~35 percent—expressed as 67 percent of people, we should be reminded, were from California, hardly a Kennedy stronghold.
BUT THEN, why should Californiaans rush to support Brown? He has been somewhat less than an effective ad-hoc effort — no one has seen it more closely than the governor. He received a balance-of-trade defect of $1.3 million when he took office in 1975. That deficit figure is now at $6.6 million. Even his campaigning has run in the red, as his deficits have increased by $1 million deficit he incurred while securing the governorship again in 1978.
david preston
BUT THEN YOU realize that he took three plane trips to the East Coast in the course of one month this past summer to talk about cutting waste and excess spending. He flew to Tokyo to reprint the Japanese for killing animals. And he went on to africa a ten-day "campaigning" called "netted him much national coverage."
rather than accept government-issue bags. All this, so he can look good.
COLUMNIST preston
Brown is trying to stay in the center of public attention, and he appears willing to do anything to stay there. He floats in and out of issues, wafting in the breeze, and then says he is successful if he has inked up a letter to his boss or to spark debate on it. There is certainly more to serving the public than sparking debate.
He has neither the record nor the strong base of support needed to defeat either Carter or Kennedy. He will appeal to some special interest groups such as the anti-immigrant groups, but the issues is something that most people will undoubtedly be able to see through.
He will adopt a conservative attitude and cry for cuts in government spending, or he will take a liberal viewpoint and call for more investment in education and a conversion to sun or wind worship.
IT IS NOT that he seems sensible and is able to move左 or right to support a particular cause. Some politicians have believed that Brown sees to cling to issues that he can exploit for his own benefit. He was against Proposition 13 originally, but he figured that if they couldn't stop the cause in his own hands, might as well lead the national cause for it.
Amtrak revamp a triumph, not fiasco.
Regardless of his political non-alliance, he has not done much of anything as a public servant the past several years, and he should be judged accordingly.
Far from a "fiasco" and a "sham," the Amtrak Reorganization Act of 1979 is one of the few reasonable efforts at transportation reform. While it does have realistic view of Amtrak's limitations, and even makes it possible for Amtrak to pro-grade transportation service instead of more political lip service.
To The Editor:
In a poll this summer, conducted by a California-based organization of state colleges and publications, 45 percent of the Californians polled said they would not be given down for president because he had not done anything important as their governor.
And now the Kanse is proclaiming that she has been asked to act only two weeks in a financial crisis, and the Kanse's editorial shows some popular misconceptions about the role of the passenger train in transit.
Jim Cartwright St. Louis, Mo., senior
Tracing the history of the 1979 Act show it to be a triumph of representative government, not a "nisman." In a fit of voter hatred, Mr. Trump's signature saw Amrak as a place to save the taxpayer a few dollars (200 million less for Amrak is more politically useful than a few billion in real terms) and several concessions, both political and practical, were made, until the present Act emerged. Only the real losers were elimination markets that truly need the service still have it.
"Service?" Getting up in the middle of the night to ride a dirty, slow train is not easy if you are accustomed by the Lone Star (or any of the other cancelled trains). I'm not alone. The "service" that Attorney General Robert R. Sanders calls "the service only." It only strains Amrak's severely limited resources, which should, as an issue of law, be used where they will do the most good.
Trains are very energy-efficient and economical—for short and intermediate distances only. Over long distances, the long travel time (most train ages average 10 to 15 years) is sufficient for support services (meals, extra crewmen, etc.) necessary, which aren't cheap.
FAILING THAT, Antrak should be adequately compensated for running comparatively empty trains through comparatively empty markets.
THE GOVERNMENT'S role in running Antrak has proven that it is the only group more inpt at operating a rail system than the other companies, and thus more practical need, determine availability of service. Yearly fights over funding made Antrak less able to plan and maintain its term planning impossible. The 1979 Act provides long-term funding and removes some of the challenges specific to economic criteria for service.
Ticket prices for long-distance rail travel
Tickets need to cover actual costs. A 10-car
train carrying 600 people between, for ex-
tremely long distances, is three hours
necessary. An 18-car train carrying
150 people (with space for 600) bet-
ween Chicago and Los Angeles in 45 hours
is not. It is a luxury that Amrak can’t afford
unless the investment is increasingly reductant to subsidize.
UNIVERSITY DAILY letters KANSAN
Divergent opinions should be tolerated
To the Editor:
What I want to comment on is not the content but the spirit in which she wrote. That spirit was exemplified in her last speech, when she joined the other Birch Society members who joined them are to be commended for going on stage. Next time they may not be so eager to express their beliefs. And despite the hardships of the past year, we will all be the worse for their silence."
The Oct. 9 issue of the Kanan carrows is utter to the editor attacking the writer's use of a term from the article, "Biercher-Nade器 in Charade." The letter critically evaluated the content of the article.
I commend this kind of writing that says "I may disagree with you but I champion your right of expression and even encourage you to exercise it."
The怀念 of reference for my viewpoint is Jesus Christ. When I first read this article (Sept 28) I felt good about it and felt a little inspired. My heart led me to the letter helped me to identify my source point. It's from the Bible: II Corinthians, 3:17. It tells me that God is the spirit of the Lord, is there?
Melissa, I want you to keep writing in that same spirit of tolerance that I sensed in your article on Nader and the Bierchers. I feel that you have a great encouragement of divergent views.
Eddie Weber
Kansas City, Kan., graduate student
Anti-nuke violence justifiable, necessary
To the Editor:
Lynn Bycchyn's editorial of Oct. 9, "Violence Threatens Anti-Nuke Cause" is important to note. We have to and have to a turn-around-check attitude in the face of a life and death confrontation with a mult-million-dollar-a-year industry that needs our help and needs on this nation and to cover up its heavy investments, rapid and faulty growth, and other conditions for employees. And all of this to insure acceptance nuclear energy and all that the consent of the people of this land.
Meantioning the violent situations of Artica, Kent State, Watts and others. Byzycak admits that they had some impact on the people who had the support of the people involved."
Also, let me point out the irony of democratic-capitalist principles that allow us to impose a narrow set of nuclear interests at all costs and that cost may be your life. When "600 state troopers and national guardenom们 back the enemy," you are wearing nightsticks, this is a violent attack on human life and human rights. The mentality behind police and nuclear interests' scare tactics
WHY, THEN, did 1,500 people try to "violently" cut through the fence at Seabearock and occupy the nuclear plant to stop its construction? Obviously the people involved supported what they were doing and knew the consequences involved—violation, aimed at them. From whom? The police have said that the police have to represent and protect.
WHO WILL dare to protest nuclear energy now?
Lynn Byczyski probably does not know about the years of peaceful protest tactics she has seen in recent demonstrations finds the back page of the news, not because she was an activist, but because they represent a minority, because that is where the promise business interests need them—of outlaws.
This movement against nuclear energy that started as study groups, information tables, community group presentations and scientific discussions escalated to sit-ups, an exercise in public demonstrations because pro-kuke proponents continue to silence the truth about nuclear dangers.
BUT EVER if the pro-drive violent tactics main肌 nicks opponents driving to appointments with news reporters to tell about them, you might be silkwalked, or if they smokebomb, mace or club肌 nicks, the anti-nike movement will never cease to outline correctly and honestly the truths about muscular violence that will have on all our lives, not just property.
This escalation of determined and aggressive tactics to counter the pro-nuke violent offense and the horror of the full scale of warfare demands that the proponents is why "it is so important for
every citizen to get informed and get Involved."
Rhonda L. Neugebauer
This struggle is essentially one of unpolice (state) "responsibility" to protect the property rights of the nuclear vested interest groups with the human rights of the health and environment of the rest of the population in this "land of the free."
Lawrence graduate student
To the Editor:
Word interpretation is arbitrary process
I am writing in response to the letter by the Rev. Dr. Vern Barnet published in the Oct. 9 Kansan letters.
I sympathize with the Reverend's problem because I have been in similar situations myself. However, I would like to point out the following:
1. Language is absolutely arbitrary.
2. One of the basic requirements for successful communication is a shared consensus.
3. There is no obvious relationship between a given word and the meaning commonly attached to that word, other than the relationship dictated by a consonant (e.g., the sound of "mean," which is in turn dictated by usage of that word. For example, the word "cow" has virtually nothing to do with the animal that it does, except for the fact that we say it does.
BECAUSE WORDS are symbolic representations of things, exegesis (the art of interpreting or explaining) is an inherently arbitrary process.
This being the case, the Rev. Barnet's IHP professors, just like everybody else, including the Reverend, are free to interptert anything and everything as they see fit.
We must not be misled by the illusion that is created whenever man is placed in a position, such as a teacher, in which he is said to "know" something. Because language is arbitrary, and often requires a special consensus (a form of which is scholarly). A word can be used any meaning derived from the use of language must also be arbitrary in nature.
Steve Pritchard
save Pichañar
Oklahoma City, Okla., senior
Letters Policy
The University Daily Kansas welcomes letters to the editor. Letters should be addressed to the editor and not exceed 500 words. They should include the writer's name, address and telephone number. If the writer is at home, they should include the writer's class and home town or faculty or staff position. They should also right in the edit letters for publication.