Page 4
Opinion
University Daily Kansan, October 15, 198
It's no waste of time
Teaching can be a hazardous occupation at times. Just ask Ross McKinney, N.T. Veach professor of civil engineering.
McKinney was named Friday to a panel to study the adequacy-or inadequacy-of Kansas' hazardous waste disposal law. Gov. John Carlin appointed McKinney to the panel.
The panel was organized because of problems with hazardous waste in Johnson and Wyandotte counties and in Wichita. The danger involved obviously has Carlin concerned.
When the Kansas Legislature convenes in January, the panel is expected to
present a report on statutes and rulings by state regulatory agencies. It appears the panel will have much to criticize in light of the problems surfacing across the state.
McKinney should be an asset to the panel. He is head of the School of Engineering's environmental health section and has been a member of the state's Advisory Commission on the Environment since its inception in 1975.
The problem of hazardous wastes is a serious one, and the problem most likely lies with the state's inadequate waste disposal laws. The panel members have an important task ahead of them.
Letters to the Editor
KU medical students get less for more in student services
To the Editor:
This letter is in response to an editorial by Bill Menezes in the Kansan Oct. 3.
First, let's set the record straight about tuition of medical students. $1,150 is our basic tuition; $12.50 is for "health services" and student activity fees, part of which is helping build a new gym in Lawrence! You might wonder why "health services" is in quotes. At the University of Kansas Medical Center there is no health service of the caliber available in Lawrence.
Since Menezes made a point of the differences in tuition between Lawrence and the Med Center, let's consider the differences in services available to the students on the two campuses. First, consider student health, which now is under the Department of Family Practice at the Med Center. For each visit, the student and/or his insurance is billed $14.
If you're a female with a medical problem, a pelvic examination costs $15, and the student population is 60 percent female. Med Center students have no pool, no gym, no tennis or raquetteball in; in fact, they have no recreational facilities whatsoever. We also have no museums, no cultural activities such as those put on by the School of Fine Arts and no newspaper; the library receives approximately six Kansans for all the students to share.
Our bookstore is small, carrying only the
barest essentials, and there is no profit sharing
with the authors.
We don't have enough student areas. Our student lounge consists of a room in the basement, approximately 20 feet by 30 feet, stocked with old, worn-out furniture from the cafeteria, poor lighting for students and a black-and-white TV with broken antennas—and this is for all students! The Graduate Student Council recently did institute movies every Tuesday, so we now can say we have access to low-cost movies as Lawrence does.
Now let's consider the proposed addition to fees for the new library. Again Menezes' figures are wrong. It is proposed that medical students attend the year and all other full-time students $20 a year.
Nursing students use the library at least as much as medical students, if not more. (I feel qualified to make that statement since I graduated from the School of Nursing; I can't speak about Allied Health students.) The library is used by all students, in addition to faculty, and any assessment should be more fairly divided. The medical students are proposing assessment of a year of medical students and $$a year for full-time students at the Med Center.
I'd like to suggest that before Menezes makes any more sweeping, condescending statements about medical students he should get his facts straight. For the $44 difference in student tuition, excluding medical students, the students in Lawrence have a whole lot more.
Jo M. Gehring-Knatz Kansas City, Kan.
Ginsberg gets ripped
To the editor:
Turning the Kansasan dogs lose on Ginsberg and Burroughs Oct. 3 makes about as much sense as trying to write $4,500 in requests from a $1,800 Student Senate budget. The fault lies as much with the individuals as with the larger organization.
Mark Pittman should sit in with the Senate. He really knows how to nickel and dime the great writers to death. He surely could set the record straight for Bren and Matt and the rest of us.
Providing, of course, that his words don't get mined by the Kansan typewriters, editors, typographers and readers.
Newsprint can be as perverse as plutonium and as devious as nickel and dinning, which seems to take precedence around here. we have SUA movies that don't work, student senators who don't read the news, can't print straight, a chancellor that didn't listen and a Board of Regents that doesn't exist.
So I guess we can't fault Pittman for being critical of the stage presence of two great writers. But I wonder why he didn't critique Thumbs on their literary talent. As Ginsberg might have said after hearing about the tampon checkpoint on Jayhawk Boulevard, "You should call this place The University of Nickels and Dimes."
Frank Janzen Lawrence special student
Frank Janzen
New system a minus
The plus-minus grading system would prove to be a nightmare for professors, a hindrance to accurate student evaluation and an injustice to hardworking students.
To the editor:
The nightmare for professors will occur when a student who has received a B-plus instead of an A-minus justly complains about being punished with such a thin, subjective distinction.
The inaccuracy will occur because the normal routine of exams and papers is unable to provide measurements fine enough to justify such a distinction. Such exercises have at least a 10 percent margin of error, and are not quite as neatly divided as they quite nicely by dividing students into five very general classes.
No grading system can hope to accomplish more than allow only the roughest comparisons between students of highly disparate quality. Any system that pursues to do more is at the least a deceptive illusion and at worst a deadly farce.
Finally, the plus-minus grading system would be unfair to hardworking students because it helps the poor students while punishing the serious. Those students who support the system only want to squeak a few extra grade points without any additional work. For serious students who already earn good grades, the system can only hurt. These serious students often are involved in high-competitive activities with other top students from across the nation, and a few tenths of a grade point may make the difference between acceptance or rejection by a prestigious law school or success and failure in national scholarship competitions.
KU students would be placed at a disadvantage when competing with top students from other institutions not using the plus-minus system, thus reducing the number of honors bestowed on our students and the University itself.
The difference between a final score of 90 percent (a-minus) and 92 percent (flat A) most likely can be attributed to plain luck. Does the difference of a few percentage points warrant greater grade or fine students? Of course not. Such an arbitrary distinction is as ludicrous as it is vicious.
I hope that the board members of the various schools will read this letter, consider its arguments and vote against the plus-minus grading system.
S. E. Wasserman Overland Park junior
The University Daily KANSAN
(USPS 569-488) Published at the University of Kansas daily August through May and Thursday during June and July except Saturday, Sunday and holidays. Second-class postage paid for Lawrence, Kansas and Burlington, Missouri. Second-class postage paid for Kansas City a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are $2 a student, paid through the student activity fee. Postmaster: Good send of address to the University Daily Kansas Flint, Hall The University of Kansas, Kansas City, Kansas.
Editor Business Manager
Carol Beter Elaine Brusher
Managing Editor Cynod Highes
Editorial Editor David Lewis
Campus Editor Judy Woodburn
Sports Editor Karen Myers
Associate Sports Editor Patti Arnold
Entertainment Editor Kevin Milla
Makeup Editors Ellen Iwanoto, Bob Schand Lennie Fogley
Game Management and News Advisor Chris Muster
Kennan Adams Chuck Chowins
Unigned editors represent the edition of the Kansasian editorial staff. Signed columnists represent the views only the writers. Larettes are welcome. They may be typemaster, double-spaced, self-styled, or otherwise untyped. All other types will be accompanied with the University, the letter should include the writer's class and homework or faculty or staff position. The Kansas reserves the right to call letters for publication. They can be delivered personally or mailed to the Kansasnewman, 1IFF Print
Access to handicapped lacks at KU
A person who is confined to a wheelchair must seriously consider the campus grounds when choosing a university. After all, he must have been admitted because he will spend most of his academic career.
Of course, when you are a freshman, you will likely encounter numerous buildings that are spread around the campus. The best way to assess whether a building that provides the fewest obstacles to hurdle.
But sometimes, because of various reasons,
this is impossible.
When I selected the University of Kansas, I
FRED
MARKHAM
Then there are buildings such as Strong and Snow Halls, in which people in wheelchairs
knew I was in for some difficulty in fighting the many barriers that cover this campus. However, because KU was the only university in the state with an excellent journalism department, I had little choice but to make Lawrence my home for the next several years.
Shortly after my first semester, I began to face a faced an upill battle against these obstacles.
steve richards son kansan
Some of my favorite obstacles on campus are the sidewalk ramps leading into Fraser and Wesco Halls. These are fun to climb; I push myself backward and my legs give out. I go flying back down only to start climbing again.
must make the long run to the back entrances to enter the buildings.
One wrong move and you and your
would be in a bumpy ride down to
the next floor.
For starters, the entrance of Flint Hall is difficult for any student, let alone a handicapped student, to fight when entering the building. The two large doors are most difficult to push and practically take a weightlift to启开. One can imagine what it is like pushing these doors, or perhaps pushing them to try to keep the door open while trying to push a wheelchair—right over a hump that sends the wheelchair flying through the air.
This obstacle provides more skill and excitement, because one not only has to fight the door's weight but also has to open the door wheeling on a narrow hall that is nothing more than a tight-rope between the door and the stairs.
The watering system on the campus also has to be one of the most ridiculous systems ever conceived.
Once inside, the elevator has a sigh of relief. Well, at least until you get up to the second or third floor. Then you discover another 100-pound door that has to be opened.
It it becomes an impossible task to get a wheelchair over the pipes and out of the way
Once in, you must fight elevators with doors that are like alligator jaws just waiting to snap at you. The doors seem as if they were when the buildings were first enclosed.
The sprinkler system consists of huge tractor-like equipment attached to large metal pipes used as hoses. These are placed in buckets, with the pipes intruding on the walkways.
The catch is to step over the pipes and to get completely away from the wild-spraying sprinklers before being soaked by a small waterfall.
before the water hits. I really don't mind the shower or bath, but I would appreciate being informed so I could bring a bar of soap. I could scrub down and take a bath.
The KU administration needs to appoint a committee to assess the problem areas of access for the handicapped and then eliminate them.
Wichita State University has organized such a committee, and today its handicapped accommodations have become some of the most improved in the country.
KU has a good beginning with its transportation system of door-to-door service. But we cannot relax the pressure on the administration if we are to have better accommodations for the disabled campus population.
KU could become a leader in major universities in accommodating the handicapped if KU officials make a sincere effort to dissolve these physical barriers.
Debt collection, consumer credit discussed
Guest Columnist
Rv Vickie Thomas
Debt collection practices and consumer credit reports are topics not often considered by consumers, particularly student consumers, until they are pursued by the proverbial bill collector or loan officer for credit when attempting to purchase a car, furnish their first apartment or a charge account.
The 1970s saw the federal government and many states act in the areas of debt collection and credit reporting to provide much needed protection for consumers. The Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, enacted in 1977, and the Fair Credit Reporting Act, effective in 1971, and their state counterparts sought to eliminate abuses in the area of consumer credit and to provide remedies for those damaged by violations of the acts.
The purpose of the Fair Debt Collection Practices Act, as stated in the act itself, is "to eliminate abusive debt collection practices by debt collectors." The act applies to anyone who falls within the definition of "debt collector," and it regulates acquisition of information about the location, nature, or condition of debtors connected in connection with debt collection, harassment or abuse by the debt collector, unfair debt collection practices and civil liability for violations of the act.
If a debt collector wishes to get information from third parties for the purpose of locating the debtor, the act prohibits the debt collector from identifying the debtor to the third party as one who owes the debt. When the debt collector learns that the debtor is represented by an attorney, he no longer can contact third parties unless the attorney refuses to supply information to the debt collector. The debt collector is limited in the methods by which he is allowed to communicate with the debtor. He can only contact the debtor between 9 a.m. and 8 p.m. Even these times may not be allowed if the debt collector knows that such times are inconvenient to debtor. Such times would be unreasonable, for example, if the debtor knew that the debtor has worked two hours and worked a mid shift. If the debt collector knows that the debtor has an attorney, he is prohibited from contacting the debtor but is allowed to contact the attorney about collection of the debt. The debt collector cannot contact the debtor at his place of employment if the debt collector knows that the debtor is not allowed by his employer to receive such communications.
Debt collectors are not allowed to harass, oppress or abuse any person in connection with collection of a debt. Conduct that violates the act includes the use of obscene or profane materials, the use of criminal means to harm the debtor, his property or his reputation; the publication of lists of debtors who
allegedly refuse to pay their debts and the hargassment of the debtor over the telephone.
He may not tell the debtor that the debtor will be arrested, imprisoned or subject to garnishment or attachment unless such action is lawful and the debt collector intends to take that action. Debt collectors also cannot use unfair practices or threatening to deposit any post-dated checks presented by the debtor before the date on the check.
Debt collectors may not use false, deceptive or misleading representations when trying to collect a debt. For example, the debt collector might represent himself as an attorney if he is not one.
Debt collectors who fail to comply with any provisions of the federal act are liable to the debtor for the debtor's actual damages or such additional damages as the court may allow, but not exceeding $1,000. If the debtor successfully proves, that the debtor collector violated the act, the debtor can recover the costs of litigation, including attorney fees.
the purpose of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, enacted in 1971, is "to require that consumer reporting agencies adopt reasonable procedures for meeting the needs of commerce for consumer credit . . . in a manner which is fair and equitable to the consumer. Consumer reports include any written or communicated agency about a consumer's creditworthiness that is used or collected to assist and establish the consumer's eligibility for credit, insurance or employment purposes or other purposes authorized by the act. Consumer reporting agencies may furnish consumer reports only in the following circumstances: in response to a court order; in accordance with the written instructions of the consumer; to a person who intends to use any information in connection with an employment purposes; or to a person who otherwise has a legitimate business need for the information in connection with a business transaction involving the consumer.
Consumer credit agencies are not allowed to include in consumer reports any of the following kinds of information: bankruptcies that occurred more than 14 years before the date of the report; suits and judgments entered more than seven years before the date of the reports; arrests, indictments or convictions of crimes more than seven years before the report; and any other adverse information sent to the report by more than seven years. However, such information may be provided if the consumer credit report will be used in connection with a credit transaction involving $50,000 or more, the underwriting of life insurance with a face value of $50,000 or more or the employment of any individual whose annual salary will exceed or equal $20,000.
Consumer credit agencies occasionally are requested to prepare investigative consumer reports. Such investigative reports deal with a person's character, general reputation, personal history and financial standing and are obtained through personal interviews with neighbors, friends or associates.
The reports may be prepared and disclosed only if a notice is sent to the consumer within three days of the requested report telling him that the report is being made. The notice must tell the consumer that he has the right to request the report, and that he must indicate whether the report is being used for employment purposes for which the consumer has specifically applied.
Every consumer reporting agency is required, upon the request of any consumer, to disclose to the consumer the nature and substance of the information contained in the agency's files on that consumer, the sources of the information, the recipients of the report if it has been furnished for employment purposes within the two years preceding the date of the request or for any other purpose within six months preceding the date of the request. The agency must also provide trained personnel to explain to the consumer any information in the report.
If the consumer requests in writing the nature of such reports, the reports must be disclosed to him.
If the consumer disputes the accuracy of an item in the report, the agency must reinvestigate such information within a reasonable time unless it believes that the claim is false. The agency finds that the information was inaccurate, it must delete such information promptly.
If either a consumer reporting agency or the user of information from such an agency willfully violates a provision of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, liability exists for actual damages and punitive damages. If the debtor is successful in proving a violation of the act, the consumer reports the actions of the attorney fees. if the non-compliance is shown to be only negligent, the consumer may recover actual damages and costs of the action plus attorney fees. The Act also provides criminal penalties for obtaining information under false pretenses and for unauthorized disclosure of information by the officers and employees of a consumer credit reporting agency. Fines of up to $10,000 and imprisonment are imposed. Kansas has enacted a Fair Credit Reporting Act identical to the federal act, and violations of fair credit reporting in Kansas constitute both federal and state offences.
Vickie Thomas is University General Counsel at the University of Kansas.
---