Opinion
Kansan
Published daily since 1912
Julie Wood, Editor
Laura Roddy, Managing editor
Cory Graham, Managing editor
Tom Eblen, General manager, news adviser
Brandl Byram, Business manager
Shauntae Blue. Retail sales manager
Dan Simon, Sales and marketing adviser
Scott Valler, Technology coordinator
4A
Tuesday, September 21, 1999
Kansas Weather Meets an Out-of-Stater
Jamie Patterson / KANSAN
Editorials
Bill banning soft-money donations should be passed by U.S. Senate
Last Tuesday, the U.S. House of Representatives took an important step to improve our democracy. They passed the Shays-Meehan bill, a provision to reduce the ever-widening inflow of money into U.S. politics. The bill is designed to level a playing field in which those with large amounts of wealth have a hugely disproportionate advantage in their ability to influence elections.
The bill will ban "soft-money" contributions to political parties. Soft money" is supposed to be used for party-building but instead has become a way in which both the Democrats and Republicans get around current restrictions on individual political campaigns. The bill will also restrict advertisements paid for by outside
Campaign finance reforms may stop the wealthy from steering elections
groups that obviously endorse a specific candidate.
This bill is vital because it can reduce the extent to which money runs politics in our country. It will ease our current situation in which wealthy groups and individuals can promote their candidates and agendas and the voices of the lower classes are left as muffled howls.
The main argument against this, and one which will be brought forth largely by Republicans when the bill reaches the Senate, is that restrictions on contributions are restrictions on freedom
of speech. It will be argued that giving money is a form of expression and thus must be protected.
This argument is correct on one point. Giving money is a form of expression. However, absolute freedom must sometimes be abridged for the benefit of society as a whole. The right of wealthy donors to steer elections is the same reason the have-nots are forgotten. The right to speak is empty when the majority is mute. Our current system usurps the maxim of one person - one vote.
Though the Senate equivalent of the bill may well fail, it is an extremely important idea. The U.S. political system must be rid of its master the dollar. The Shays-Meehan bill is a step in the right direction.
Erik Goodman for the editorial board
Censorship by schools is bad news
Two weeks ago, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals made a decision that could potentially affect the content allowed into student newspapers across the nation.
The court decided that student newspapers fall under the control of the universities that finance them. Essentially, universities legally may act to see that student newspapers only print positive, preapproved news. The court based its decision on a case in which high school newspapers were put under similar constraints. The justices argued that student newspapers are not public forums and thus do not merit the same First Amendment protections afforded to the professional press.
The ruling stemmed from a case at Kentucky State University in which the student newspaper's adviser was removed from her position because she
First Amendment should protect student newspapers
allowed students to print cartoons and letters that were critical of the university's administration.
Although this decision only directly affects schools in Kentucky, Tennessee, Ohio and Michigan, it has implications for student newspapers across the country. It is a bad law and teaches all the wrong lessons to student journalists.
One of the most important things college journalists must learn is how to responsibly exercise their First Amendment rights. This means checking facts scrupulously and then printing the truth. It also means taking informed, principled stands on issues and then
printing them on the opinion page. Censoring student journalists doesn't teach them to be anything but fearful.
The editors of the University Daily, the student newspaper of Texas Tech University, were so incensed by the ruling that they withheld the day's news of Sept. 9. Instead, they ran an editorial condemning the decision, a press release from the Student Press Law Center and nothing else. The rest of the paper, save advertisements, was filled with the word "censored."
Some Texas Tech administrators criticized this action; they said it was too extreme. We disagree. We support the editors and staff of the Texas Tech newspaper in their efforts to show what censorship really does. As Barry Goldwater said in 1964, "Extremism in the defense of liberty is no vice; moderation in the pursuit of justice is no virtue."
Kansan staff
Jennifer Roush for the editorial board
Chad Bettes ... Editorial
Seth Hoffman ... Associate editorial
Carl Kaminski ... News
Juan H. Heath ... Online
Chris Fickett ... Sports
Brad Hallier ... Associate sports
Nadia Mustafa ... Campus
Heather Woodward ... Campus
Steph Brewer ... Features
Dan Curry ... Associate features
Matt Daugherty ... Photo
Kristi Elliott ... Design, graphics
T.J. Johnson ... Wire
Melody Ard ... Special sections
News editors
Becky LaBranch . . .Special sections
Thad Crane . . .Campus
Will Baxter . . .Regional
Jon Schlitt . . .National
Danny Pumpley . .Online sales
Micah Kafitz . .Marketing
Emily Knowles . .Production
Jenny Weaver . .Production
Matt Thomas . .Creative
Kelly Heffernan .Classified
Juliana Moreira .Zone
Chad Hale .Zone
Brad Bolyard .Zone
Amy Miller .Zone
Advertising managers
Broadon your mind: Today's quote
“One of the penalties for refusing to participate in politics is that you end up being governed by your inferiors.” - Plato
**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 hometown if a University student. Faculty or staff must identify their positions.
How to submit letters and guest columns
**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.
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 Chad Bettel or Seth Hoffman at 864-4924.
If you have general questions or comments, e-mail the page staff (opinion@kansan.com) or call 864-4924.
P pop quiz: What is leadership? Well, I don't know either, which is odd, really, given how much emphasis is placed on it around here. Especially at the beginning of the year, you hear from all corners of campus, "Get involved; it'll help you develop leadership skills," or "She's
Leadership training doesn't make leaders
Perspective
a really great leader." There's even a student group, KU LEAD, that's devoted to developing leadership on campus. But what is leadership?
Erin Simpson columnist opinion@ansan.com
Maybe leadership is the ability to get people to follow you. If so, then how is leadership different from brainwashing? Or coercion? I can get you to follow me by holding a gun to your head, but that doesn't make me a leader. Maybe leadership is the ability to get things done. But even great leader!
can face insurmountable odds that might prevent their success.
My dictionary says that to lead is to show the way by going in advance. That definition is full of characteristics of a leader: intelligent (the leader must know the way), courageous (the leader must first go it alone) and empowering (the leader shows the way to others so that they will follow on their own). These characteristics bring up an interesting question: Can leadership be taught?
The University sure thinks so. Did you know that the Student Organizations and Leadership Development office, which is part of the Office of Student Life, organizes three separate leadership workshops every year? Three! Student Senate has its own separate workshop, as do the scholarship halls. All exist under the premise that with the right icebreakers, speakers and experts, leadership can be developed.
Well, I think they're wrong. I don't think leadership can be taught. It can be made better; it can be refined. But it can't be taught. Period.
You can teach a student good communication skills, how to write an agenda, how to speak in public, where to go for help, how to run a meeting
and how to keep things organized. A workshop or seminar even could teach a person how to recruit members, talk to the press and work with the administration. A good seminar might even talk about crisis management, dealing with adversity and problem solving techniques. But you can't make a student want to do it in the first place.
To want to do it at all requires initiative. It requires vision. It might even require a little arrogance. You can't have a meeting to make people want to go to other meetings. The whole process is cyclical. The only people at leadership seminars are the people who have the initiative to go in the first place. That means the speakers and experts are preaching to the chair. And maybe that's why the O&L office and others in the University think that you can teach leadership: They're only teaching the leaders. They don't grab random people out of Biology 100 or off Wescoe Beach. They deal with people who already have initiative and vision. If they didn't already have initiative and vision, they wouldn't be at the seminar in the first place.
No leadership seminar can put the fire in your belly that you need to be a leader, the kind of fire that works its way into your heart and soul and keeps you awake at night searching for solutions. A seminar can't make you see things that are flawed and make you want, crave or yean to fix them. That's because a workshop can't teach conviction, devotion, courage, bull-headed determination, compassion, intelligence or imagination. These are the things that distinguish a leader from a president, and leadership from mere organization.
A seminar can teach you how to deal with failure. But it can't teach you how to pick up the pieces when everything you've worked for and believed in falls apart. A workshop can't convince you that what you did made a difference, that it wasn't all for naught. Only a leader knows that. And only a leader, a real leader, will want—will insist on—picking up those pieces knowing that something might just break them all over again.
Simpson is a Lenexa junior in political science and international studies.
Opportunities to learn exist off campus as well
On Sept. 1, I attended the University Forum at the Ecumenical Christian Ministries Center, at 1204 Oread Ave. While I was familiar with ECM and the wide variety of services it provides to the
I believe in classroom education outside the traditional classroom. It has been my experience that not recieving a grade for learning reinforces the thought that you can learn in any setting and at any age. I decided that this semester I would really explore this concept and tap into some of the community classrooms we have here in Lawrence.
community by playing host to non-credit classes, being a space for community theater and allowing organizations to have weekly meetings there. I had never attended the University Forum. The Forum, a weekly lecture series, is held every Wednesday from noon to 1 p.m., a tradition established back in the '40s. An important service provided to the community, these lectures are offered by the ECM at no cost.
Breeze
Luetke-
Stahman
guest columnist
opinion@kansan.com
University students, professors, administrators, emeritus professors, Lawrence high school classes and members of the Lawrence community attend the Forum. Between 35 and 100 people are usually in attendance, although as many as 250 people have attended a single lecture. Topics and presenters for each semester are determined at an open meeting held at the end of the previous semester. There is a concerted attempt at balance between genders; local, national and international issues; and University and community concerns. Lectures from the fall schedule include "Pornography: A Panel Discussion," "Mayan Ruins and Sacred Sites of Belize" and "Health Care in America: A Social Responsibility or a Profitable Business?" These topics appear diverse and of interest to a wide variety of attendees.
The forum I attended was presented by David Katzman, professor and chair of American studies. The title of the discussion was "Athletics and the University: Selling of the University, Part II". Nearly 100 people attended. Participants included KU students, an honor class from Lawrence High, many emeritus professors and alumni, student senators and members of the KU Athletics Department. The lecture focused on the often strained relationship between a university and its athletic department. As the title suggests, the issues of eligibility, salaries and facilities were discussed.
One fact that caught my attention was that, typically, the highest-paid male coaches receive five times what a chancellor earns and more than eight times that of the highest- paid professor.
I am equally impressed by the presenters: professors, doctors and directors of both national and local programs. The creditials of these speakers reflect national and international recognition.
Luetke-Stahliman is an Olathe sophomore in sociology and American studies.
Many questions were asked and comments made after Katzman finished. The discussions of the issues were among individuals who began their statements, "Well, I graduated from college in 1950, and..." to current students concerned with the fact that the present KU student body subsidizes the department through Student Senate. After the lecture, I saw many people mingling, asking questions of each other, offering opinions and debating points. The atmosphere during the lecture was also different from a traditional classroom in that no one was taking notes for a later exam, catching up on other homework or reading the Kansan. Rather, the people there made the time in their days to attend and to learn something of interest to them, knowing there would be opportunity for discussion. Here, people gather each week — for another lecture, another issue — simply for the love of learning.
U.S. should help East Timor refugees
Feedback
Your recent editorial on East Timor asks, "How could the United States possibly turn the other way and let the madness continue?" Indeed. In the recent violence, credible estimates are that about 7,000 people have been killed (some estimates are lower). In the 1975 Indonesian invasion and its aftermath, 60,000 E. Timorese were killed. The U.S. did not "turn the other way," but actively prevented the United Nations from acting against Indonesia. The US supplied 90 percent of the weapons used.
According to Nairn (and othr
The killings escalated in the late 1970s during the Carter administration, which then increased arms sales to Indonesia. Eventually, 200,000 East Timorese, one-third of the population, lost their lives as a result of this near-genocidal occupation. In 1991, several hundred East Timorese were massacred, and two American reporters severely beaten by Indonesian troops. One of these reporters, Allan Nairn, is currently under arrest in Indonesia for risking his life to report on the killings there, while most other reporters have fled.
ers), the current violence is under the control of the Indonesian military and could be stopped at any time. The militias killing in East Timor today were created, armed and trained by the Indonesian army over the last year. The U.S. during this time could have put pressure on Indonesia to prevent the current violence. It has not done so. The least we can do now is to insist that Indonesia stop the killings, disarm the militias, withdraw and allow the refugees to return home.
Michael Barfield Biological sciences research associate
.