Opinion
Kansan
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY
Published daily since 1912
Jodie Chester, Kannon
Gerry Doyle, Managing editor
Ryan Koerner, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
mare Harrell, Business manager
Jacam Holm, Retail sales manager
Dan Simon, Sales and marketing advisor
Justin Knup, Technology coordinator
Tuesday, September 8,1998
Editorials
Clean credit record pays off in end
Each year, credit card companies offer students and incoming freshmen an opportunity to improve their credit records. To some students, a credit card means a source of cash for emergencies or even frivolities when there is none left in the bank. Although students focus on the convenience, a credit card may provide them, they also should remember that every series of purchases made on credit comes with an obligation to pay for those purchases.
Instead of acquiring credit cards merely for convenient cash advances or small, high-interest loans, students should consider the possession of a credit card a chance to prove their fiscal responsibility to lending institutions — especially if they look forward to financing a loan for a business, car or home. There is no question that payments must be made on time.
Charges can mount quickly, so students should keep track and stay ahead of their bills.
Keeping a clean credit record is as simple as swiping a card through a strip reader. You can thankfully do both without any help from mom or dad. Students need not be reminded again that purchases charged to a credit card are similar to loans received from a bank. Credit card bureaus in charge of monitoring credit transactions are informed when a student applies for and receives a loan or a credit card and when a student fails to make any loan payments on time.
Charging with a credit card is convenient because most local businesses accept payments by credit card. If students are going to use a credit card as
their primary mode of exchange, it is necessary for them to keep a personal record of their purchases. It is much simpler and wiser to keep a list of major expenses than it is to remember how many rounds of drinks were charged to the bar tab the other night.
If students keep track of their charges, they already know how much they owe. They then pay as much of the total balance as possible, if not the entire balance.
If the entire balance is not paid, then whatever balance remains unpaid grows each day an amount depending on the card's annual percentage rate. The higher the APR, the faster an unpaid balance escalates.
Systematically paying credit card bills on time is essential to avoiding blemshes on credit records. If students ritualistically buy things with a credit card, they ought to ritualistically pay off bills.
Kris Olson for the editorial board
Robinson is meant for education
Although it is a great inconvenience to students who cannot afford health clubs, Robinson Center is primarily an educational, — not recreational — building. Students crowd into the weight room during the limited hours of all-student access in hopes of getting fit but find themselves waiting in lines for most of their workout. Angry that the University of Kansas does not provide them with unlimited recreational hours, they denounce the University's lack of concern for physical fitness.
However, Robinson was created for the purpose of physical education, not recreation. Mary Chapel, director of recreational services, said Robinson's top priority is academics. New equipment is purchased and new programs are implemented each year to insure a top-of-the-line education for students.
Robinson Center ranks last in the Big 12 as a recreation facility for students.
Students who complain about the lack of an open recreation building may not be maximizing their options. HSES classes at Robinson allow students to exercise during the day, provide access to the highest quality equipment, and cost less than joining a health club and students receive University credit for working out.
That is not to say that the University is not in desperate need of a new recreational building. Bob Lockwood, instructor of health, sport and exercise science, said that Robinson is far behind compared to other universities' recreational centers and agreed that something needs to be done. Robinson is ranked 12th out of all recreational centers in the Big 12. When there is such a need for improvement, it is surprising that three years ago the proposal for a new recreational facility failed in a student referendum.
Until another vote is taken, students will have to battle long waits or take advantage of the quality education that Robinson does offer.
Kansan staff
Emily Hughey for the editorial board
Ann Premer ... Editorial
Tim Harrington ... Associate Editorial
Aaron Marvin ... News
Gwen Olson ... News
Aaron Knopf ... Online
Matt Friedrichs ... Sports
Kevin Wilson ... Associate sports
Marc Sheforden ... Campus
Laura Roddy ... Campus
Lindsey Henry ... Features
Bryan Volk ... Associate features
Roger Nomer ... Photo
Corie Waters ... Photo
Angle Kuhn ... Design, graphics
Mellissa Ngo ... Wire
Sara Anderson ... Special section*
News editors
Audit rising managers
Stacia Williams . Assistant retail
Brandi Byram . Campus
Micah Kafitz . Regional
Ryan Farmer . National
Matt York . Marketing
Stephanie Krause . Production
Matt Thomas . Production
Traci Meisenheimer . Creative
Tenley Lane . Classified
Sara Cropper . Zone
Nicole Farrell . Zone
Jon Schlitt . Zone
Shannon Curran . Zone
Matt Lopez . Zone
Advertising managers
Broaden your mind: Today's quote "The one thing in the world of value is the active soul." — Emerson
How to submit letters and guest columns
Letters: Should be double-spaced typed and fewer than 200 words. Letters must include the author's signature, name, address and telephone number plus class and home-town if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
Guest columns: Should be double-spaced typed with fewer than 700 words. The writer must be willing to be photographed for the column to run.
the County of Kansan.
All letters and guest columns should be submitted to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stuffer-Flint Hall. The Kansan reserves the right to edit, cut to length or reject all submissions.
For any questions, call Ann Premer (premer@kansan.com) or Tim Harrington (tharrington@kansan.com) at 864-4810. If you have general questions or comments, email the page stuff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4810.
Wisconsin judgment threatens KU tradition
Partha Mazumdar Guest columnist
Perspective
In the fall semester of 1923, the two elected student governments of the University of Kansas, the Men's Student Council and the Women's Student Government Association.
Ten years later, these student governments proposed and implemented the student activity fee. They reasoned that because student organizations needed money, this fee was necessary. The fee was mandatory; the only students exempted from paying were according to the May 14, 1933 University Daily
tion, formed a committee to supervise the funding and budgets of all student organizations.
kansan reported "those students who would be forced out of school unless so exempted." The annual fee for 1933-1934 was $8.75; $6 paid in the fall and $2.75 paid in the spring.
This fee still exists, and you all know from your enrollment forms that the 1998-1999 school year fee is $428; $214 paid in the Fall and $214 paid in the Spring.
Since 1933, KU's student governments have overseen the fee and allocated as they and their constituents have seen fit. Of the $214 every full-time student pays a semester, $39 goes to the student unions, $86 to the health center, $4 to the construction of a new child care center, $20 to the Athletic Corporation, $13 to the Recreation Center, $3 to student media, $2 for campus lighting, $16 to campus transportation including the bus system and Saferide, $6 to finance programs for historically disadvantaged populations at KU, $1 to the University environmental center, and $22 to help finance student or student-centered organizations such as the Black Student Union, KU Environs, the Center for Community Outreach, the Lied Center, Headquarters, the Multicultural Resource Center, and Student Senate itself—I don't know where the other $2 goes.
tention.
On Aug. 10, 1998, the 7th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Southworth vs. Grebe — a case in which the plaintiff argued that University of Wisconsin student-fee monies should not be used to finance organizations that advo-
Because of a recent court decision in Wisconsin, our 65-year history of student control over their own student fees is now a matter of contention.
The court used no notice. Some of the objectionable Wisconsin organizations specifically mentioned in the case were the Campus Women's Center, the Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual Campus Center, UW Greens, the Madison AIDS Support Network, and Students of National Organization for Women. Because Kansas is not in the 7th Circuit, this case does not immediately apply to KU, but any appeals court decision is important nationally, and the Kansas Board of Regents has appointed a committee to recommend policy concerning student fees. This committee will undoubtedly take Southworth v. Grebe seriously.
I disagree with the court's decision and hope that the Regents disagree as well. I further hope that KU students and the student government make a strong case to the Regents advocating this position.
The Associated Students of Madison — the University of Wisconsin student government
and Student Senate distribute money basically the same way; on a value-neutral principle. The student government has rules by which every organization it finances must abide. If an organization abides by the rules, it will get its money. The more established and successful an organization is, the more money it will get.
Although there are many reasons to disagree with Southworth v. Grebe, I will focus on one.
cate causes some students may disagree with. The court ruled in favor of the plaintiff.
Everybody will get money if the rules are followed, and it is Student Senate's job to evaluate how stable and successful an organization is.
If someone disagrees with the positions of an organization, he or she can form an opposing group and seek funding. Through this process, dialogue on campus is fostered and people throughout the University community benefit. However, if one agrees with the plaintiffs in the Wisconsin decision, neither group gets financed and there is no dialogue. A university is a place for the exchange and promotion of ideas, not the silencing of them.
And if one disagrees with how Senate is distributing the money, or believes it not being value-neutral, he or she can vote for a new batch of senators in the spring.
Just as taxes and tuition are mandatory, student fees should be mandatory as well.
The only exception should be the one from 1933: Inability to pay.
maxudar is a Pittsburgh, Penn., graduate student in American studies.
Financed groups provide interaction and support
David
Perico
opinion@kansan.com
money is for. Student groups provide a way for students to learn about civic involvement and provide opportunities for social interaction that is lacking in the classroom. Student groups also provide an even more valuable service to students that is often overlooked. By creating opportunities for social interaction, organizations can keep students from becoming socially isolated on campus and prevent students from feeling lonely or despondent. At the very least, it's good to have all kinds of student groups for students to join so members can identify and try to help members who become distracted with personal problems.
It's sad to see that a federal court in Wisconsin thinks it has the authority to tell college students what they can do with their student fees. I think an argument
To be honest, there are groups here on campus that I consider repugnant, and there are groups that I think receive too much money for frivolous purposes. But if a group of students pays money into the
could be made for banning funds for some groups, but in a practical sense it's absurd to think that anyone could establish a rule or law that will keep "bad" groups from getting money while "good" groups continue to receive funds.
dents pays money into the system, no overreaching federal judge or vocal minority of students should have the power to say the organization doesn't have a right to get some of that money back. The only thing that really needs to be questioned is what the money is for.
If student groups served no other purpose than to provide social support and to help stu-
Perico is a Lawrence sophomore majoring in English.
major elections I hope that students here at the University will decide the issue is important enough to let our legislative representatives in Topeka and Washington know that we want something done about the problem and to prevent it from happening here. Passing pre-emptive laws in Congress and passing similar resolutions in the Student Senate can keep this judicial blunder from crossing the state line into Kansas. Let your representatives know what you think.
dents with problems. I think every penny spent on student groups would be well-spent. Because of this, it offends me that an unelected courthinks it can control this aspect of campus life.
The benefits of student groups are important enough that it would be wrong for me to spend time trying to oppose the funding of groups I don't agree with. It goes without saying that there will always be someone who doesn't like your group, no matter what kind of group it is. I don't object to anyone having a negative opinion about an organization, but students and the rest of society (judges included) need to move away from the idea that it's OK to threaten the very existence of groups they don't like.
This recent court decision affecting student groups also brings up another serious problem that affects campus life here and elsewhere. That problem is apathy. Whether the problem is apathy about organizations, or the Student Senate, or politics, it is a problem that we cannot afford in this country. This federal court ruling is a perfect example of this. Because federal judges serve at the pleasure of Congress, you might think that Congress would be flooded with letters criticizing the ruling. However, it's not happening even though there's a major election is just two months away.
Feedback
Columnist didn't check Saferide facts
I am writing to comment on the column concerning Saferide in the Sept. 13 issue of The University Dally Kansan. As a former driver of Saferide, I quickly ascertained that you did not interview any employees of Saferide before you wrote your piece. The opinion you presented is a
.
gross exaggeration of the Saferide patrons. Of course, there are inebriated people calling. I won't deny that. However, they are a minority of the people who actually use the service. I can say that the majority of people who use Saferide are students that study very late into the evening and do not own a vehicle. Saferide can be used for other purposes as well. I once had to
take a very sick student to the Emergency Room at Lawrence Memorial Hospital.
I am not trying to attack your opinion. You are entitled to it. I would just expect that a second-year law student would attempt to cover all the bases of an issue before presenting an opinion.
Zac Graves Lawrence graduate student