4
Tuesday, December 1, 1987 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Free degree
If you are looking for an easy major, you will have to look a little harder in the future.
little harder in the future. In a move that will benefit both the students and the University, the Board of Regents has decided to scrap KU's personnel administration program.
The notoriously easy degree must be reorganized by the fall of 1899, or the program will be permanently cut.
1989, of the program will be permanent. The current curriculum lacks structure because there are virtually no core classes. Students may substitute a variety of courses for the few core classes there are, canceling any existing structure. Furthermore, too many of the courses in the major are optional.
Although eliminating the degree will be a considerable inconvenience to students, the action will be beneficial in the long run. The University is saving students from working for a potentially useless degree. Because the degree requirements are so lax, students do not learn any one area thoroughly. And employers recognize this leniency.
employers recognize The personnel administration major is attractive to students; it is one of the most common degrees granted by the College of Liberal Arts and Sciences. Eliminating the program altogether would be a disservice to students. But allowing it to continue in its present form is a greater disservice.
Grain gains
Under an Agriculture Department subsidy program announced last month, the Soviet Union will be allowed to import 2.4 million metric tons of U.S. wheat. And future imports are likely.
Changes in grain and gas policies could lift Kansas' sagging economy.
Under the agreement, grain purchased from farmers with government subsidies will be drained out of the silos and sold to the Soviets. Decreases in surplus wheat will translate into greater demand and higher prices. Kansas produces more wheat than any other state in the United States. Thus, Kansas farmers have much to gain from higher grain prices.
have much to gain from the export agreement. But all Kansans glean the benefits from the export agreement. Agriculture is one of the state's largest industries, and it pumps millions into the economy.
A second program, if approved by Congress, would boost the state's economy even more.
A Congressional Research Service report concluded that mandatory gasohol sales would generate more revenue for farmers and decrease subsidies paid by the federal government. The pending legislation stipulates that 10 percent of all motor fuel sold in the United States next year be gasohol, increasing to 50 percent of sales by 1992.
Both the export agreement and gasolon plan, if approved, paint a sunny future for Kansas and for the United States as a whole. Ultimately, the government could save money spent on subsidies and the country would decrease its dependence on foreign oil.
Sponsors of the gasoloh bill emphasize that gasoloh creates less carbon monoxide, which would have positive effects on the environment.
In all, both the export agreement and increased gasohol sales would fuel the economy's recovery.
In the neighborhood
Public housing and drug problems seem to go together.
Public housing and aging facilities. And solutions cannot be imposed from the outside. Change occurs only when residents themselves instigate it. In Kansas City, Kan., and Omaha, Neb., they are doing just that
At a recent meeting in Kansas City, public housing residents and officials, Housing and Urban Development representatives, and law enforcement officers made a commitment to work together to clean up the public housing neighborhoods.
Rather than simply trying to insulate themselves from problems that surround them, tenants are finding strength by banding together to solve problems rooted in their neighborhoods.
Suggestions for change involve honesty about the problem and pride in the neighborhoods.
Honesty with children and teen-agers of the neighborhoods will begin with straightforward education on the effects of drug abuse and a commitment by parents to watch for the warning signs of abuse.
Pride in the neighborhoods had already begun to manifest itself when residents participated in drug protests. The residents plan to continue their show of pride by caring enough to call the police when illegal activity occurs.
Editorials in this column are the opinions of the editorial board.
News staff
Jennifer Benjamin...Editor
Juli Warren...Managing editor
John Benner...News editor
Beth Copeland...Editorial editor
Sally Striff...Campus editor
Brian Kaberline...Sports editor
Dane Ruettlmann...Photo editor
Bill Skeet...Graphics editor
Tom Eblen...General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Bonnie J. Hardy...Business manager
Robert J. Hughes...Advertising manager
Kelly Scherer...Retail sales manager
Kurt Messersmith...Campus sales manager
Greg Knipp...Production manager
David Derfelt...National sales manager
Angela Current...Classified manager
Ron Weems...Director of marketing
Jeanne Hines...Sales and marketing adviser
Guest shots should be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The water will be photographed.
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and less than 200 words and must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University of Kansas, please include class and hometown, or faculty, or staff position.
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters and guest shots. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer/Flint Hall.
can be mailed or brought to the Kansan.
Letters, guest shots and columns are the opinion of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University Daily Kansan. Editorials are the opinion of the Kansan editorial board.
The University Daily Kansan (USPS 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Stairfower Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 60405, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and finals periods, and Wednesday during the summer session. Second-class postage is paid in Lawrence, Kan. 60404. Annual subscriptions by mail are $40 in Douglass County and $50 outside the county. Student subscriptions are $3 and are paid through the University's mailing system.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to the University Daily Kansan, 118
Staufer-Flint Halt, Lawrence, Kan. 66045.
High hopes invite hasty agreement Complex military strategies muddy aim of accord
Bv TIM AHERN
Associated Press
U. S. and Soviet officials are looking beyond the nuclear arms treaty that will be signed at next week's summit to one that would sharply reduce the long-range, strategic arsenals kept by both sides.
Sen. John Warner, R-Va., who has been one of the senators most deeply involved in the complex negotiations, said, "I have been optimistic all along, and am even more so now, that we could move from an intermediate-range treaty to a strategic treaty that would make the world safer."
Warner's statement was echoed by a number of other officials, both in and out of the government, in the wake of last week's announcement that both sides have worked out final details of the Intermediate-range Nuclear Force (INF) treaty. The pact will be formally signed next week when Soviet leader Mikhail Gorbachev flies to Washington for a three-day summit with President Reagan.
While Reagan seeks Senate approval of the INF pact, U.S. and Soviet negotiators in Geneva will continue to work on details of another treaty that would cut deeply into the vast arsenal of strategic weapons maintained by each nation, which cover ranges of more than 3,000 miles.,
Those weapons, about 12,000 on each side, are on land-based missiles, submarine-launched missiles and long-range bombers. While each side has all three types of weapons, the distribution of each kind of weapon within each country varies, reflecting historical differences.
For example, the Soviets, who have been more concerned about land threats, have about 75 percent of their long-range weapons siting at land-based missiles such as the huge SS-18s, while the other 25 percent is split between submarines and bombers.
The United States, by contrast, has been protected from invasion by a pair of oceans. About 50 percent of the U.S. arsenal is aboard submarines, while the remainder is split between land-based missiles such as the Minuteman and MX, and bombers like the B-52s and B-1Bs.
Those complexities will make it difficult to agree on a strategic accord, according to retired Rear Adm. Gene LaRocque, head of the Center for Defense Information, a private group that has been critical of Reagan's arms control policies.
"Verifying a treaty covering all those weapons would be virtually impossible. So come up with a
Analysis
reiterable treaty on INF, which involves the same types of weapons, but to do it on a strategic treaty in a way that satisfies everyone — I don't think it's going to happen."
But the negotiating effort likely will get a boost from next week's summit, according to Michael Krepon, an arms control expert at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.
V
You've got two guys who love the spotlight, who have a flair for the dramatic and who have relatively unscripted summit meetings. So you may see some dramatic proposals.'
Michael Krepon arms control specialist
"There's really been very little progress in Geneva on the strategic treaty," said Krepon. "What happens is that every so often, the big guys get together and there's a major move and that gets turned over to the negotiators and they work things out."
"And my guess is that what's will happen next week. You are likely to see something there. You've got two guys who love the spotlight, who have a flair for the dramatic and who have relatively unscripted summit meetings. So you may see some dramatic proposals."
Last year's Reagan-Gorbachev meeting in Iceland produced a general agreement to cut the long-range arsenals on each side by 50 percent. That has now been generally refined to allow each side to have 1,600 launchers, carrying a total of 6,000 warheads.
In the wake of the Iceland meeting, both sides have debated a so-called "grand compromise" that would mean deep cuts in nuclear arsenals in return for restrictions on defensive systems such as Reagan's anti-missile system, known formally as the Strategic Defense Initiative.
The Soviets have repeatedly insisted that limits on SDI must be made part of any treaty on long-range weapons.
But Reagan has repeatedly refused to permit any restrictions on SDI. Last week, speaking of SDI, he told employees at a defense contractor, “you’re not working to build a bargaining chip. It will not be traded away.”
Still, the possibility of a restriction on SDI concerns some people, such as Jim Hackett of the Heritage Foundation, a private organization which strongly agrees with Reagan's conservative philosophy.
"What worries me more than anything is this arms control euphoria," said Hackett. "We tend to go in great pendulum swings, from one extreme to the other. We're now on a swing toward arms control and I'm very concerned that the president might throw away perhaps the greatest accomplishment of his presidency, which was getting SDI started."
Sen. James McClure, R-Idaho, a critic of past treaties, agreed with Hackett. "I'm worried about the possibility that limits might be put on SDI." McClure said. "And if that were to happen, I think it would be dangerous for this country and I think you'd have a hard time getting something like that through the Senate."
But Sen. John Glenn, D-Ohio, a member of the Armed Services Committee, said, "I think we can get an acceptable treaty. The INF agreement shows that we can negotiate successfully, that we can eliminate weapons if it is in the interests of both sides."
Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, said, "I'm all in favor of eliminating weapons, but we need to protect SDI."
One possible compromise on SDI centers around the possibility of limiting SDI testing to a laboratory for at least 10 years, permitting the United States to remain within the restrictions of the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile treaty.
But Hackett is critical of that idea. "I think that's a back-door way of killing the SDI program," Hackett said. "The Soviets are very clever. They've been talking for the past six months about how they don't want to kill SDI they just want to abide by the ABM treaty."
Despite Reagan's opposition to any SDI restrictions, there is room for progress, Krepon said.
"The more progress they make on Reagan's watch, the more they lock in his successor," he said. "I think you can look for some interesting Soviet proposals in the near future."
katz
k.l. thorman
BLOOM COUNTY
by Berke Breathed