4
University Daily Kansan/ Wednesday, September 25, 1991
OPINION
Dress codes inhibit students' free thinking
President Bush has a new education program that he has labeled "Choice." As the "American way" promises to save our prep schools, elements of censorship are creeping in with it.
Back in high school
Student dress codes, designed to reduce crime, have reached the Kansas City area. There can be a strong case made for forced fashion. In some school districts, crime has gone down with the prohibition of expensive coats, jewelry and the wearing of various sports logos. Sociologists, however, acknowledge no conclusive studies.
Without question, this is a violation of the constitutional rights to privacy and
free speech. Just as these young people are trying to establish their own identities, they are being forced to conform or get out. In Houston, two brothers were expelled for not cutting their hair; when they refused to clip their locks, their father was sued for not complying with the truancy laws.
What school boards across the country are doing is making scapegoats out of Air Jordans and blue bandanas, the latter due to their association with gang colors. True enough, students today are using clothing for a sense of belonging, an area where schools are failing. Perhaps if educators got the students
involved in decisions such as these, a more positive socialization would develop.
Telling people how to look risks alienating free thinkers — just as it may decrease the chance of getting your valuables stolen. The students need to be consulted on matters of school safety and discipline, or rebellion is as likely as conformity. To mandate fashion without giving youth a choice would be to ignore part of the education process. All in all, it's just another brick in the wall.
Michael Dick for the editorial board
LETTERS to the EDITOR
Political life is indeed public
I stumbled through the philosophical smattering of guest writer Dennis Lowden; he bring up various interesting arguments about the validity of judging a politician, and I came to the conclusion that, be they toward mammals or homo sapiens, unpleasant attitudes or hostilities are not entirely misleading about a person's character, but they are vital components toward evaluating political character.
When a politician enters the arena, the public eye becomes his reality. A faux pas becomes, or should become, a life or death situation for a political career. Why, then, is there a persistent call to exhume Darren Fulcher from his self-dug political grave? After all, he definitely misled voters by campaigning in the midst of undisclosed scandals. I am speaking not only of his arrest for assault but also of the report concerning his unaccountable hours involving his work with the Salvation Army last year. In covering up these incidents and proceeding in his sterling campaign, Fulcher violated the sacred relationship of trust between an elected official and his constituents.
But why add insult to a rehashing of tired old information? Simply because he will not leave office and he insists that he was illegally expelled from office. The fact remains that he was removed for a reason. There was no conspiracy involved. The Senate members acted to expel Fulcher because he violated the trust of the voters. But since they allegedly written laws according to a hand book, who is to say they would not do it again, provided they are given a solid rule to expel members?
What may stop this action is the plea that both sides of the story have not been heard. But after attending the rally in support of Fulcher on Sept. 18, I get the idea that there is no "other side" to offer. What I feel was presented at the rally was just an interpretation aimed solely at making people forget the issues at hand. But even as
a white person, I can understand how devastating it must be for the first African-American elected and dismissed from the office of student-body president of a university.
Though what Fulcher did may to some extent be forgivable, forgiveness does not erase history, as both African-Americans and white people know all too well. So maybe we should concentrate on the real issues that are behind this controversy and not just the fact that the Senate acted out of its boundaries, but the reason they took the steps they did.
James Reece
Topeka sophomore
Reporters need to check facts
It appears that no one at your paper can read as well as write. If you had read my previous complaint against your reporters' stupidity, perhaps you might have avoided receiving this note.
In the Sept. 12 issue of the *Kansan*, an article appeared about the women police officers in the KU police. As I have stated before, it appears that we cannot write a report without making a rather blatant and stund errors.
Torefresh your poor memory, I said before that your reporters are not investigating the topic before taking pen to paper. It takes less than a second or to read one word. Perhaps two for your reporters. It takes slightly longer to see how to spell one correctly. If your reporter had the foresight to read the name of the new service weapon, maybe she would have spelled it correctly. Is a Glock. Spell it with me, G-L-O-C K. It is not a Glock. It is a simple mono-syllable word; it should never be mispelled.
Secondly, there had never been and never will be a semiautomatic revolver. If you do not understand the difference between a semiautomatic pistol and a revolver, I suggest you contact the BATF. (Sorry, I should know better than to assume that you could figure out what that means.) The Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms is in the Blue Pages and could set you straight. If not, contact me and I'll draw you some pictures.
In fact, why don't you just call me anywhere before you print a story on law enforcement. I proofread it for technical correctness. Furious. Forget that about a fact. I do something that your reporters don't do. I'll look it up!
David Klocek Overland Park senior
University governance allows independence for Senate
The current dispute in the Student Senate and the reaction from many students on campus illustrate a fundamental problem with this thing we call "University governance." Not many students on campus understand what it is — and what it is not — and how it functions within the University community. More problematic is the fact that most students don't care about such groups as the Faculty Senate or Student Senate until there is a crisis such as we are now experiencing. This is an unfortunate reality because these governance groups are involved daily with shaping the quality of the academic curriculum as well as the educational and social climate of this campus. But my purpose in writing this column is more focused on the current problem in the Student Senate and explaining the distinct and different roles that University governance and the central administration will play in the resolution of this issue.
University governance, as it is called, consists of three units: the Faculty Senate, the Student Senate and the University Senate. The latter group is made up of representatives from the
other two. Various committees and councils carry out the work of the three senates. What is the work of the three senates? Basically, University governance is a system established by the faculty and students in the late 1960s as a means of organizing themselves to represent their views and opinions to the central administration of the University. Through the University Senate, faculty, students and the University administration come together to jointly determine what is best for KU.
Each group - faculty, students and administrators - has its own special and unique perspective on campus issues and problems. This is as it should be, for the dynamic tension that exists among these three groups works to ensure that all interests are considered as we build a consensus on what is best for all of us at KU. To ensure that this process works, it is important that each group, particularly the Faculty Senate and the Student Senate, maintains its autonomy in selecting its representatives and determining the position that best serves its constituency. Should the
David Ambler
Guest
columnist
University administration control or in any way manipulate the selection of officers for the faculty or student senates, the system would lose its viability and credibility. For University governance to truly be a participatory system, its parts must be independent of each other.
Thus, it should be obvious why the University administration has maintained its distance and a neutral stance regarding the current controversy about the leadership of the Student Senate. That is not to say that we are disinterested or unconcerned; quite the contrary. We care about issues and all the individuals who have been victimized, harmed or otherwise exposed by this tragic set of circumstances. But that is very different from taking a stand in favor of or in
opposition to a particular person or position. Neither do we have the authority nor would it be prudent for those of us on the administrative staff to dictate who should represent the student body or how the Student Senate should conduct its business.
The constitution for this governance system is called "The University Senate Code." Each Senate establishes its own set of rules and regulations for governing their units. Initially and subsequently, the chancellor approves these documents and amendments to them. But they are, in effect, autonomous guidelines by which each senate conducts its business.
These are not perfect documents, however, as the recent controversy has demonstrated. Two major problems have been uncovered in the Student Senate case. First, there is no independent manner explicitly provided in the Senate Code by which the rules and regulations can be interpreted when their intent is in dispute. Thus, each Senate become the "court of first resort" in interpreting its own rules and regulations. Second, none of the
rules and regulations of the three senates provides an explicit means for disciplining or removing one of its members or its officers.
The University Judicial Board is a unit of University governance. Although it has not been given explicit powers to interpret the rules and regulations of the various senates, it does play a major role in "conflict resolution." Thus the Judicial Board has agreed to hear the appeal from the Student Senate disputes. On at least two other occasions in recent years, the Judicial Board has heard cases concerning whether or not the Student Senate and its Election Commission followed its own procedures for electing officials. In the current case, it appears that the question before the Judicial Board is whether or not the Student Senate had the authority within its rules and regulations to remove the president of the student body in the manner that it did.
I am pleased that the Judicial Board agreed to hear the a case, for it should provide an impartial hearing for the various parties to this case. Its decision will be objective one, I am sure,
and it should provide some guidance for future actions of the Student Senate. More importantly, University governance now must to amend its various rules and regulations to correct these obvious shortcomings
To the non-involved student, all this may seem highly complex and complicated. To some it would seem more expedient for the University administration to step in and exercise its ultimate authority and solve this problem forthwith. But such actions would signal an end to an independent voice for the students. Your ability to advocate or oppose actions that affect your welfare would be compromised. In short, Student Senate would become an instrument of the University administration.
Believe me, it is not that now, and you must support actions to maintain its independence. University governance, like any democratic system, requires commitment, effort and time to work its magic in producing what is in our best interest. I believe it is worth it; I hope you do as well.
David Ambler is associate vice chancellor for student affairs.
KANSAN STAFF
HOLLY LAWTON Editor
JENNIFERREYNOLDS Managing editor
TOM EBLEN General manager, news adviser
Editors
Editors
News Erik Schutz
Editorial Karen Park
Planning Sarah Davis
Campus Eric Gorski
Sports Mike Andrews
Photo Brian Schoeni
Features Tiffany Harness
Graphics Melissa Unterberg
KATIESTADER Businessmanager
RICH HARSHBARGER Retail sales manager
JEANNE HINES Sales and marketing adviser
Business Staff
Campus sales mgr. Benjamin Bryant
Regional sales mgr. Claire Claxton
National sales mgr. David Mellwaine
Co-op sales mgr. Laise Keeler
Production mgrs. Jay Steiner, Wendy Sterz
Marketing director. Wendy Sterz
Creative director. David Habiger
Classified mgr. Jennifer Jacquint
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include class and homework, or faculty or staff position.
Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be pho-
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 113 Stuart-Fint Hall.
Loco Locals
bv Tom Michaud