Al Martin: University Party Louder voice needed for change
Question—What do you think is the basic issue in this campaign.
Answer—We have attempted, and I feel successfully, in the platform that we are running on this year to present the students with problems that I personally have heard about ever since I've been up here, that I've spoken with administrators about; and I think we can reach workable solutions through the ASC, which is essentially a communications organ for the students.
I feel that there is no one essential issue in this campaign. Our platform is intimately concerned with the general student welfare.
Q. —What do you think, speaking in general terms, is the role of the ASC?
A. —The ASC must in the last analysis act as an organization whose basic role should be to articulate the student problems to the administration and faculty. It would be very idealistic to hope that the students would ever have the dominant voice in university affairs, but I am convinced they should have a much larger voice than they now have. The ASC can do much to change university policy if the council is well directed. The need for capable and responsible student leaders has never been more pressing.
Q. —Do you think de facto segregation in Greek houses is an issue this spring?
A. It hasn't been my feeling that it is as large an issue this year because of the steps that have been taken by the various living groups. I believe the next step in solving this problem should be to establish a committee composed of the students who are involved in this problem.
Q. —Would you also put the role of the ASC as an interest or pressure group to represent the constructive views of the student body to the administration?
A. —Often times, yes. However, I don't believe that in many cases the students' wishes are going to necessarily conflict with the administration or the faculty.
The administration and faculty many times either get out of touch with student problems, or do not have sufficient time to investigate and solve these problems themselves. We are not always confronted with issues of students vs. faculty or students vs. administration. By utilizing the Student Opinion Poll, it is now possible for the ASC to clearly ascertain student problems and to act to solve them.
Q. About academic reorganization: What kind of groundwork has been laid to see how much of a role student government can play in abolishing the English Pro and reorienting Western Civ?
A. —Let me talk about the English Pro first. It's the position of the University Party and the opinion of many students and faculty that three semesters of English are much more indicative of a person's proficiency in English than one essay, especially the way this one is organized.
The topics in most cases are informational, and if one doesn't know much about the topic on which he is required to write, it's hard to write a good essay.
I have talked to many deans and teachers about the changes UP has proposed. If a strong and lucid case can be presented to the administration, we will achieve the changes UP is advocating. An example of this is the current ASC action being taken to establish a drugstore in the Kansas Union. The vending machines for this drugstore have already been ordered. It will soon be operating on a trial basis.
As far as Western Civilization goes, it is rumored every year that Western Civ will become two three-hour courses. This probably would be the most desirable situation. However, there's not enough room in the sophomore schedule for two additional three-hour required courses. A four-hour, one-semester course will fit. A faculty committee studying this problem favors establishing such a course with one lecture and two discussions a week.
As Western Civ is set up now, it's designed to be an independent reading program; but for the vast majority of students, it simply becomes a matter of reading the Western Civilization outline and hoping you can get through the hour.
Our proposed four-hour course will fit into the sophomore schedule. It would eliminate the comprehensive exam; you would take a final in this course as in any other course. The SUA currently brings guest lecturers frequently to KU. Such lecturers, for example, an active communist, could explain his position to W.C. students in morning lectures and conduct his SUA forum discussion in the afternoon, as is now done. Western Civ would become much more interesting and meaningful to the students than a pure political theory readings course. It would be vitally concerned with current problems.
The college Intermediary Board has been discussing these for several years; but they are only 10 people, they are a self-perpetuating organization, and they can't as such, speak for a majority of the students on campus, whereas a political party that has been elected by the majority can.
Q. —About relocation of the Kansas Union: What research has been done into the feasibility of the relocation of the Kansas Union, how soon it can be done, and so on?
A. Our basic idea here is to build a combination union convention center somewhere on the southwest part of the campus near the majority of the students.
Similar unions have been constructed at Oklahoma State, Iowa University, Nebraska, Indiana and Michigan—to name a few. We're very far behind many large universities in our union structure. Our present one is simply outdated and insufficient. It is the proper function of the ASC to investigate the construction of a union convention center. A convention center would make a valuable addition to our campus. For example, the AURH wanted to have their national convention here recently and couldn't do it because present facilities are woefully inadequate.
Again, we're acting as a publicity organ and a channel for student opinion. The desirability of such a union convention center is obvious. When you look at the structures at other universities and how they add to the campus, the feasibility of such a project becomes evident.
This is only one example of the many conventions KU is forced to turn down. We could also with such a union have the NCCA basketball tournament at KU.
What we intend to do with the present Union if such a new union structure is completed is let it exist in its present function.
But if the new union attracts students that live on the east part of campus, then the old union could be sold to the University for classrooms or office space. This would simply involve partitioning the large rooms in the union.
Q. —What provisions have been made and what can you do to specifically get the creation of this coffee bar to be open all night and the institution of the meal ticket system?
A. —Let me first explain the coffee area. There are several places in Lawrence that stay open all night and cater to large crowds of students. Especially if the new AWS regulations are passed, there will be an even greater demand for such places to go in the evening.
The idea of having a union operated all-night coffee shop would simply be to fulfill more properly the need that now exists.
It could easily be operated, like the Hawklet in Summerfield. It would take no additional personnel to run it; it has a juke box, which attracts students much more than any of the other all-night coffee spots that now exist; it's on campus, and students without cars can go to it.
The feasibility of our proposal is manifest. It's just another example of something which the administration has been too busy to consider. The students can assume much of the responsibility for the planning that needs to go into such a change.
AL MARTIN
'Concerned with student welfare...'
Now, the meal ticket system. Many unions in the United States have meal tickets. The idea here is the same as in cafeterias-one pays on a monthly basis.A choice of three or four menus would be offered and the food would be cheaper.
As was pointed out in the ASC meeting last week, the prices of main dishes in the union have risen 40 per cent in the last year. This is a terrific increase, and we are presently investigating this.
I think the need for such a meal ticket system is evident, and that there are sufficient students who have no other place to eat than the union should justify the institution of such a system.
Q.—What exactly is the relationship of University Party to SDS, in respect to student disciplinary regulations?
A. —The University Party doesn't have any relationship with SDS or with any other organization on campus, but we try to be sensitive to all students, regardless of any groups to which they belong.
There is a great deal of student concern with all the issues that we have presented in our platform. Obviously, we are going to include many issues in our platform that have been the sounding boards of other organizations.
The individual in Kansas becomes legally responsible at age 18. We believe that any interference by the University, which prevents the individual from assuming his full role as a responsible citizen is detrimental to both the personal life of the student and his education. For example, the Disciplinary Committee in many cases considers a student guilty unless he can prove himself innocent. This is in violent contradiction with the laws of our land. Hence, we are advocating as an ideal, a statement of policy that the University be relieved of its legal judicial functions.
I think if you look at my record and what I've done here, and at Janet's record and our qualifications in general. I think I have a right to say that we're qualified to enact, if not en toto, many of the things we have in our platform.
So actually what you're questioning is the role of the ASC. This platform isn't any longer than Vox Populi's. It's simply concerned with student problems instead of with paper politics and the internal workings of the ASC.
Now I'm not making a blanket condemnation of their platform; but I think that on the whole, ours shows much more farsight than theirs. Look at some specific things.
"Vox Populi will seek to guarantee that student athletic ticket prices will be eliminated as soon as the loan for the stadium for expansion is repaid."
We passed that two years ago; it's just simply a vote-getting plank they put in the platform.
"Vox Populi will initiate legislation granting any KU student the right to transfer his athletic ticket to any other KU student, but not to anyone else."
Last week, they voted against this in spirit. Bob Vorhees introduced a constitutional amendment saying that people could transfer their athletic tickets, if they wanted to. The idea behind this was that we are paying up to $20 now for our athletic tickets, and we ought to be able to transfer them.
The Vox Populi party voted this down. They just reversed their stand here.
This is indicative of the entire platform, if you look at the whole thing. It's concerned with things that, in some cases, the ASC has done; or like Stop Week—they say use the Calendar committee, but this was tried in 1963 and proved ineffective.
They have the Board of Student Personnel as a major plank. This is the old Merit Commission; there were two or three motions presented in ASC by Don Eversmeyer in 1963. This is an old UP party plank, and the Vox Populi voted it down every time it was proposed in the council.
A comparison of the two platforms will show that Vox Populi is not as concerned with problems that are facing the majority of students and with problems that are as pressing to the majority of students as is the University Party.
In summation, what I would say is that the University Party platform shows much more genuine and realistic thought in being concerned with student problems, and I'm going to repeat what I've said in relation to other things. We're concerned with issues that affect the entire student body and not.with the internal machinations of the ASC.
I'm not saying that some of the Vox Populi ideas aren't good. Some of them do have merit.
I think the University Party platform is much more practical, realistic, and designed to meet the needs of the student body.