4
Tuesday, September 2, 1986 / University Daily Kansan
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Again, a warning has sounded from the halls of the University. Again, the message followed good news.
Last week, a head count of students on all University campuses indicated that 3.8 percent more people had enrolled this fall than last. In all, 25,599 students enrolled, a record and 939 more than last year.
Chancellor Gene A. Budig expressed pleasure at the record enrollment, just as he had publicly rejoiced over a record $36 million in grants the University received last year.
The grants and the record enrollment indicated that the University was a highly regarded school for higher learning, a vital partner in the state's future. Budig said.
Yet, his reaction also hinted that he and other administrators and faculty have a common worry. Will KU be so highly regarded when the Kansas Legislature's 1987 session opens in January?
As al convocation, Budig and others let loose a cry of frustration: The University needs more money. It cannot be expected to educate more
people, improve programs and build for the future without additional help from the state.
"We've been absorbing 800 to 900 students for which we've received no additions in the budget," said Del Brinkman, vice chancellor for academic affairs. "Yes, we have been hurt."
Opinions
Brinkman pointed out a sad reality, one governed by Board of Regents planning methods and politics. For KU to get a larger base budget, the record enrollment must be sustained. Yet the enrollment cannot be sustained without money to keep programs consistently excellent.
The facts have not changed.
The facts have no change.
Last year, the Legislature allocated enough money for faculty to receive a 2.5 percent increase in pay when the Regents asked for 7 percent.
This year, the Regents have asked for an 8 percent increase for the fiscal year that begins July 1, 1987.
The truism has not changed. The University needs more money. It needs the money now. Without it, the University and the state will suffer dearly.
Silent anniversary
On Sunday morning, outside the main shipyard gates in the Polish port city of Gdansk, a lone man placed a bouquet of flowers at the birthplace of an ill-fated revolution.
Just six years after he brought Polish workers to the brink of victory in a struggle with their government, it was Lech Walesa who stood alone to mark Solidarity's birthday.
Those demonstrations were front page news. On Sunday, news of Walesa's activities was buried inside most newspapers next to a shoe sale ad and a pitch for furniture.
Throughout Poland there were demonstrations — the largest attracting 8,000 — but they were tiny compared to the street-filling demonstrations that preceded the government's August 1980 agreement that officially recognized Solidarity.
The chilling effect of the martial law imposed by the Polish government in 1981, coupled with the ineffectiveness of the U.S. response to the crackdown, paralyzed Solidarity. Indeed, it may be dying.
It's just another example of President Reagan's nonexistent human rights policy. His "quiet diplomacy" is merely a silence that has gone unquestioned for far too long.
A give and take situation
Give and take
That's what the residents in McCollum Hall need to concentrate on, not last week's immature bickering back and forth. The 289 upperclassmen and graduate students are upset because the 800 freshmen are ruining the atmosphere of what was supposed to be a hall primarily for upper-level students.
If this doesn't work, so be it. Students, whether they are underclassmen or graduates, should know what to expect when they choose to live in a residence hall. Along with group meals, group activities and group living, come occa-
The freshmen apparently have quieted down since the graduate students complained, and that's good. But some residents aren't optimistic that the silence will continue. If not, the graduate students need to make a personal effort to communicate with the freshmen. The upperclassman can act maturely by knocking on a few freshmen's doors and rationally explaining their side.
ional group noise and disruption. If the burden of living with the underclassmen is too great, maybe the graduates need to consider living elsewhere.
Because of the current residence hall overflow, more freshmen will be living with the upperclassmen for awhile. And despite the graduate students' push for their own hall, it is not the top priority with the residence hall office. Fred McElhenie, director of residential progams, said his office was putting most of its energy into solving the overflow problem.
Besides, the University can't even pay the faculty enough to compete with other universities, much less come up with the funds to build a brand new hall.
It's a give and take situation; the freshmen need to be considerate of others' need for quiet, and the graduate students need to quit their whining and either buck up or bail out.
News staff
News staff
Lauretta McMillen ... Ednor
Kady McMaster ... Managing editor
Tad Clarke ... News editor
David Silverman ... Editorial editor
John Hanna ... Campus editor
Frank Hansel ... Sports editor
Jacki Kelly ... Photo editor
Tom Eblen ... General manager, news adviser
Business staff
David Nixon ... Business manager
Gregory Kaul ... Retail sales manager
Denise Stephens ... Campus sales manager
Sally Deew ... Classified manager
Lisa Weems ... Production manager
Duncan Calhoun ... National sales manager
Beverly Kastens ... Traffic manager
John Oberzan ... Sales and marketing adviser
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words and should include the writer's name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
Guest shots should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters and guest photos. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Staffer-Flint Hall.
The University Daily Kansan (USPS 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Stauffer Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 66045, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and finals periods, and on Wednesday during the summer session. Second-class postage paid at Lawrence, $29.00; third-class postage paid at Douglas County and $18 for six months and $35 a year outside the county. Student inscriptions are $3 and are paid through the student activity fee.
POSTMASTER. Send address changes to the University Daily Kansas, 118
Strauffer-Flini Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 68045
Time to curb national speed laws
"55 mph — We can LIVE with it." That's what some bumper stickers sav.
However, there are a growing number of people who aren't convinced. They say that the 55 mph speed limit is ridiculous, especially in the western states. They want the speed limit increased to at least 65 mph. They argue that the energy crisis is over and few lives are saved by the 55 mph limit.
I agree with what they want, but for different reasons.
Although the 55 mph speed limit ac
The federal government should stop
burdening the states with these regulations. The states should be allowed to decide what speed limit they want. That would give the people more control over what goes on in their state. For these reasons, the federal government should get out of the speed limit business.
tually does save a significant number of lives, I'm against the federal government forcing it on the states. Here's why.
Columnist
The federal government has a lot of important functions, such as providing national defense and conducting foreign policy. But it also has gotten involved in almost every aspect of U.S. Life. As a result, a huge bureaucracy has been created that wastes billions of dollars every year.
Our founding fathers would have wanted it that way.
So you ask: How does the federal government enforce its edict on speed limits?
Simple. If a state does not enforce the 55 mph limit, it loses badly needed federal highway funding. That's the money that helps repair roads and bridges.
That the states aren't rigorously enforcing the limit is another reason why Uncle Sam should get out of the speed limit business.
So you ask again: How does the federal government know whether a state enforces the law?
Simple again. Detectors, buried in the roads, measure the vehicles' speed as they pass. A random sample of data taken over 24 hours is measured four times a year. If more than 50 percent of the vehicles exceed 55 mph, then a certain percentage of that state's highway money is taken away.
That's blackmail
Try this experiment. Get on the turnipke and set your cruise control at
55 mph, then count the number of cars and trucks that pass you and guess their speed. At the same time, count how many people you see getting speeding tickets from the Highway Patrol. See what I mean?
Despite appearances, the states apparently control their drivers enough to keep their fund status. Also, each state is allowed a certain amount of adjustments. For example, a certain number of cars may have defective speedometers, so the number of actual speeders is lower.
The new drinking laws are another
example of federal meddling. The federal government should not force states to adopt a minimum drinking age of 21, and at the same time threaten to withhold federal highway funds.
If a state wants a 21 year-old drinking age, more power to them, but if another state does not, that's their prerogative.
Why does the federal government involve itself in areas that could be more easily controlled by the states?
Maybe it's because the bureaucats in Washington don't think the states can handle a simple task like setting the speed limits on their highways.
The simplest reason for giving this responsibility to the states is that it directly affects the state's citizens, who deserve a say in such matters. The idea that states retain autonomy on issues that don't directly affect the federal government or other states is known as states' rights.
But states' rights isn't much of an issue anymore, because most agree that the government doesn't give up any of its power easily.
Our founding fathers saw the great need for states' rights. They never would have dreamed that the federal government would have grown so large, powerful and wasteful.
And they never would have dreamed of telling the states what speed their horses could go.
Politics and press doom drug war
Welcome to Ronald Reagan's war on drugs. It's a wacky war, and unfortunately, U.S. casualties have been numerous. Politics and incompetence have once again worked together to ruin an otherwise feasible plan. How is this billion-dollar war going?
As one U.S. Drug Enforcement Administration official described it, "It does not seem to me that we're capable of doing anything in this government without great folderel."
President Reagan presented a directive in April that said narcotics smuggling was a national security problem. Using almost any available and outlandish method, he has placed greater emphasis on halting drug trafficking.
The directive gave the military a larger role in the fight against drug smugglers. But the Pentagon was not accustomed to fighting such a war, and the military has done its best to avoid Reagan's bold new adventure.
The Drug Enforcement Agency, Customs Service and other federal and state agencies, were expected to cooperate with the military. Together, they were supposed to fight the supply side of the drug problem.
The highly publicized "just say no" campaign against drugs, led by Nancy Reagan, was aimed at the demand side of drug trafficking. Although it was a well-planned
and well-executed battle against drugs on the streets, it has not been enough.
The war has made a small dent in the supply, but it could be much more effective. Cocaine seizures have risen from less than $3 billion in 1981, to more than $12 billion in 1985. But the number of cocaine-
John
Gregor
Columnist
related deaths have risen from more than 200 in 1981 to more than 500 in 1985
Now pushers have a new and more deadly weapon.
Sales at "crack houses" have become so common that they frequently appear on the evening news. We also have seen a few of our boys in Washington make a buy on national television to prove a point. They are aware of the drug problem, they look great in designer sunglasses, and they will do anything to get your vote.
Crack, a more addictive and less expensive form of cocaine, is rapidly becoming the new pied piper of U.S. youth.
Needless to say, dealers were unimpressed and crack remains as popular and available as ever.
Another Reagan tactic to fight the crisis was the media wonder, "Operation Blast Furnace."
Pack 'em up boys, we're going to Bolivia. The war against the suppliers has begun.
More than 170 U.S. soldiers, about a dozen DEA agents and members of 53 news organizations made up the U.S. participants in the operation. U.S. pilots flew an elite group of Bolivian soldiers, known as Leapoids, on search and destroy missions against cocaine labs in the jungle.
During one particular mission the Leopards raided an empty, abandoned lab. That was typical of just about all of their raids. However, two lab employees returned on that occasion and a 17/year/old boy was nabbed — probably the biggest catch of the operation.
The people who ran the labs knew about Blast Furnace well before it got underway. It seems that everyone in Bolivia was prepared, except those involved in the operation. Reporters covering the story watched as nothing was accomplished.
The problems in Bolivia and here at home, according to one American official involved in Blast Furnace, is that "it's all politics. Every big operation we've had for the past two years ... has been blown."
Indeed, even after their Bolivian
folly, federal agents decided to blockade New York Harbor, hoping that at least one drug bust could be made. Well, there were some arrests, including one for outstanding warrant for armed robbery, and one for violations of marine safety laws.
Why all the damaging publicity about such sensitive operations? Well, in the case of Bolivia, the White House blames the DEA for letting a few reporters in on the mission. Some DEA agents blame the military. One said that the "Pentagon had to be dragged into this kicking and screaming."
Still others are pointing the finger at the State Department.
rigger in New York" Well, the Coast Guard had been talking about the blockade long before it started, and it was surprising that pinchers hadn't planned their day around the water-borne festival.
President Reagan's dream of a drug tree generation in the United States can not be achieved if his war against incompetence doesn't take a more positive turn.
Unless the proper agencies and military branches can work together effectively, operations such as Blast Furnace are a waste of taxpayers' money and a complete waste of time. Too many politicians are fighting this war and the results have been typically worthless.
Mailbox
Drinking law sad sign
Tell me what is wrong with the youth of today. They all sit on their rear ends while they are commanded about like little children. The change of the drinking age to 21 should have sparked a rebellion among youth. If the authorities would have tried this 20 years ago, it would have been a total failure. I feel that we need some of that motivation for rebellion that
was prevalent in the Sixties.
Up to now, the youth have shown no reaction to the new law. If the youth of today disagree with the change of the drinking age, I suggest they react in the following ways.
youth would have voted, the representatives probably would have reconsidered.
Vote. The drinking bill was passed like a charm simply because the percentage of voters who were 18 to 25-years old was practically nil. Our representatives felt no pressure to disagree with such a bill. If the
Organize protests. This is to all who feel the rage within themselves and possess some sort of leadership to start a major outcry. We must make this a national issue. The headlines should say: "Students Across the Nation Protest Drinking Age Change." This would once again
pressure the representatives to reconsider and change the age back to 18.
The youth of today, believe it or not, still have representation in government. They have already changed the drinking age to 21. We need to get together and take control before the voting age is raised to 21.
Christopher Bribach
Lawrence freshman