4
University Daily Kansan
Opinion
Friday, April 4, 1986
Now the voters can decide.
All the so-called sin issues that have haunted the Kansas Legislature for the last two years have been approved and will go on the November ballot.
A state lottery, pari-mutuel betting on horse and dog racing and liquor by the drink now depend on popular opinion as measured on election night and not in telephone surveys.
But although legislators cleared pari-mutuel and liquor by the drink relatively free of cluttering amendments, the lottery resolution was not so lucky.
The House, in stretching for enough votes to gain the necessary two-thirds majority, added several amendments that have no business in the state constitution.
Fortunately, most were removed by the joint conference committee that formed the final version. But the two that survived would hardly protect lottery ticket buyers and pander to the notion that there is something inherently
crooked in the running of a lottery.
One requires the state to post the odds of winning. These odds, although astronomical, are still lower than those against receiving a state income tax refund.
The other would cause the lottery to expire June 30, 1990, unless a majority of both houses agree to keep it going.
This may be better than the original provision, which would have required a two-thirds majority to resuscitate the lottery. But it needlessly forces extra work on legislators, who can kill the lottery at any time they wish.
The lottery is a popular, if inefficient, way to raise revenues at a time when voters are reluctant to pay new taxes. As gambling, it promises less success than dice and as a tax it provides no economic solution to the state's economic malaise.
But voters and ticket buyers in other states have shown that they want it and like it. Kansas voters now have the chance to show what they think.
A wise step forward
After years of dealing delicately with the South African government and saying that constructive engagement was the best policy toward Pretoria, the Reagan administration finally has decided to recognize the African National Congress.
This is the smartest and most recent move the Reagan administration has taken in its dealings with South Africa, By recognizing the ANC, the administration demonstrated its concern that apartheid in South Africa is wrong and remains unaltered by President Pieter Botha's petty attempts to change it.
It is true that the ANC is a radical coalition of fighters and has a violent record. But most revolutionaries, when dedicated to their cause, are willing to kill and die for their freedom.
Many South Africans, both blacks and whites, predict that South Africa will not change by peaceful means. Afrikaners believe that they are God's chosen people to rule South Africa.
Thus the ANC must fight to achieve its one-man, one-vote goal. There may have to be a bloody war before it reaches this goal.
This is a belief that was taught by the Dutch who settled in the Cape of Good Hope in the 17th century and has been perpetuated since.
Apartheid is disgusting, for under it. South African blacks are no more than slaves. They are forced to live outside of white cities. They are forced to carry passes and are in danger of arrest at any time. Under apartheid white only signs hang, banning blacks from parks, beaches and restaurants.
The primitive apartheid is the only legal form of race discrimination that is still around. It is just a short step from the Jim Crow laws that existed in the United States during the 1950s.
By recognizing the ANC, the United States is no longer seen as a hypocrite that denounces racism but supports South Africa.
The nation's most important program for cleaning up hazardous dumps is in dire financial straits and could be slowing to a halt.
Save the Superfund
Although Congress passed stopgap legislation before Easter to keep the stalled "Superfund" afloat, the measure will keep the program going only until May 31. What's needed is a long-term reauthorization to continue the vital cleanup of toxic waste areas.
Congress recognized this grave problem in 1980 when it
created the $1.6 billion Superfun to clean up waste sites. But the cleanup has barely begun.
The hazardous dumps may well be the most serious environmental problem in this country, mainly because of their potential for contaminating much of our drinking water.
Of an estimated 22,000 potential hazard dumps, the Environmental Protection Agency compiled a list of 542 dumps that represent the most serious threat to public health. Most have begun some remedial activity, but only a handful have completed the cleanup.
The problem did not occur overnight. These waste sites were allowed to grow for years, and the price must now be paid. Letting the Superfund go slowly bankrupt will only stall necessary cleanup measures and allow yet more time for the hazards to affect our health.
News staff
News staff
Michael Totty ... Editor
Lauretta McMillen ... Managing editor
Chris Barber ... Editorial editor
Cindy McCurry ... Campus editor
David Gilee ... Sports editor
Wilfrado Lee ... Photo editor
Susanne Shaw ... General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Brett McCabe ... Business manager
Davidixon ... Retail sales manager
Jim Williamson ... Campus manager
Lori Eckart ... Classified manager
Joel Producers ... Product manager
Pallen Lee ... National manager
John Oberzan ... Sales and marketing adviser
Letters should be typed, double-spaced, fewer than 200 words and should include the writer's name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University, include class and homework, or faculty or staff position.
Guest shots should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The
The Kanans reserves the right reject or edit letters and guest shots. They can be mailed or brought to the Kanans newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Flint Hall.
The University Daily Kanaan (USPS 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Stairwater-Flint Hall, Kansas, Kan. 60415, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and finals periods, and on Wednesday during the summer session. Second-class postage paid at the U.S. Postal Service for $27 per week. $27 per month in Douglas County and $18 for six months and $35 a year outside the county. Student subscriptions are $3 and are paid through the student activity fee.
POSTMASTER: Send address change to the University Daily Kansan, 118
Stauffer-Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 68045.
Unprofessionalism hampers Senate
Should Gay and Lesbian Services of Kansas be financed with your money? The Student Senate thinks so. Should GLSOK use your money to advertise a Gay and Lesbian Awareness Week? The Student Senate thinks so.
The Student Senate is not representative of the majority of students on this campus. There is wasteful spending on trivial groups such as Jayhawk Defense Initiative, Freshman Dislocation and the Rocky and Bowlwinkle Fan Club, Watching Sense hearings is like watching a circle that hasn't gotten its act together.
Those are harsh accusations.
However, I was able to attend
the Senate meeting March 26. I had
hear horror stories of shouting
matches, name calling and
general unprofessionalism.
The meeting starts with the roll call. If a senator is absent then he or she gets a half-absence. If he's not absent, you have a meeting. He gets a whole absence.
One trick a few senators like to do is be present at the first roll call and then leave. Then, when the meeting is about to adjourn, one of their friends runs and gets them so that they can be present for the final roll call.
During the meetings, senators were talking, doing homework, reading, eating, and crocheting. With all of that background activity, it's no wonder that it takes the Senate so long to get anything done.
Victor Goodpasture Staff columnist
In fact, it was an hour and 15 minutes into the meeting before it actually got under way.
This is not to say all senators are guilty. There are some senators who are very serious about getting something constructive done.
A lot of the action takes place outside of the Senate chambers. Groups of senators and their friends get together, while the meeting is in progress, to lobby, chat and generally gossip.
Student Body President David Epstein called it a lot of "wheeling and dealing."
That wheeling and dealing was certainly evident when the GLSOK bill came up. It asked for $565 to advertise the organization's GALA week.
Nothing could have been more appalling, but the Senate passed it with virtually no debate.
Most students tolerate GLOSK but they certainly don't want to have it forced down their throats or have their money wasted on it.
The Senate thought otherwise.
Charles Lawhorn, a third-term liberal arts and sciences senator,
asked for a roll-call vote on the bill. The majority of the Senate refused and only a voice vote was
used. The bill then passed.
Lawhorn says he asked for a roll-call vote because he thought students should know what their senators voted on.
He said, "Senators are afraid to go on the record as having supported the activities for GLSOK Week . . . I feel a lot of people feel they would be victimized if they voted against it."
Well that's just dandy! If what Lawhorn says does actually occur, then the whole purpose of having a Senate has failed miserably.
When a bill for the $5 increase to help pay for the renovation of the Kansas Union came up, things really got out of hand.
After some pretty heavy debate, several senators started offering amendments to the bill, and slowly things got bogged down. Then someone offered a complicated proposal that would take a certain percentage of the five dollars out each year as the renovation neared completion.
After a few moments of pondering this new amendment, someone yelled "Gramm-Rudman!" and all hell seemed to break loose. Vice president Amy Brown quickly reestablished order, but the fragile stability of the Senate body had been nakedly exposed.
Finally, the amendment was sent to committee and the Senate voted on the original bill. The bill passed by more than a two-thirds
majority. End of story? Not by a long shot.
After the vote was taken, someone wanted to tack on another amendment. So the bill was changed again. Then debate over the bill started again. At that point about 10 senators left.
Then the vote came around again. This time it came down to the wire. On the final vote the bill had the necessary two-thirds majority. Then someone who had voted yes changed his mind and voted no. The bill didn't pass. Then someone else who had voted no changed her mind and voted yes. The bill finally passed.
The Senate adjourned at 12:45 a.m., almost six hours after it started.
But the Senate is getting things done. One senator pointed out that two of Epstein and Brown's four campaign promises had been accomplished and that the other two were in the works. The senator also said that the lighting issue was finally going somewhere under the current administration.
Epstein can consider this a midterm report card. He said he would like critics to wait until his performance of his administration.
The Epstein administration could be one of the most successful administrations in recent memory, but it needs to adopt a more professional manner.
U.S. actions in Nicaragua unjustified
"Doesn't the president have something more exalted to ask than that we provide military aid to a mixed group of mercenaries, thugs and democrats seeking to destroy a wretched regime in a poor country that knows nothing but repression and civil war ... for seven decades?"
Rep. Gerry Studds, D-Mass., has put that question to the Reagan administration regarding the U.S.-supported guerrilla war in Nicaragua.
Indeed, this illegal support of the contras fighting against the government in Nicaragua is immoral and detrimental to both nations economically and politically. However, the Reagan administration has stooped to the lowest levels, including violations of international law to overthrow the Sandinista government.
The United States, though supposedly a great democracy and the leader of the free world, is involved in an attempt to overthrow an elected government in Nicaragua, thus preventing people of that nation from enjoying the same political rights that we have. As stated by the Los Angeles Times, there is in fact a broad-based support for the Sandinistas in Nicaragua. There is no justification for not respecting the sovereignty of another nation, regardless of its political ideology.
The International Court of Justice has ruled that U.S. involvement in Nicaragua is illegal and must be halted. The Reagan administration responded by declaring that the United States would not be bound by world court decisions for the next two years, and that he should stop terrorist activities in the region. Is this how the leader of the free world should behave?
Reagan and blind followers claim
Jon Gregor
Guest columnist
that this is a war for democracy. They fail to point out that the Sandista government — which has brought about some social, political and economic reform — is much less repressive than the U.S. supported Somoza regime that preceded it.
The contrast, as described by the Washington Post, are made up partially of former Somoza supporters and national guard members. These groups have routinely killed civilians and carried out political assassinations.
They are not freedom fighters; they are murderers and rapists supported by narrow-minded ultrac conservatives who see everything in terms of the classic East-West struggle against expansionism. There is a strong philosophy that should have died with the fall of Vietnam.
The CIA began financing a secret war against the Sandinistas in 1981, supposedly to block the flow of aris from Nicaragua to leftist guerrillas in El Salvador. Later, upon further investigation, Congress found little evidence of weapons trafficking between the two nations.
Reagan has been quoted as saying that the present government is communist and totalitarian. However, its tolerance of social, political and economic pluralism lies somewhere between communism and democracy as we know it. Therefore, it cannot be labeled as either.
Also, in the Los Angeles Times, Reagan said that what he proposed in Nicaragua was fully sanctioned by the United Nations and the Organization of American States. This is, again, untrue. If he were confident of the legitimacy of his actions, he would have abided by the world court's decision. There is also no provision in U.S. law to justify his actions in Nicaragua.
President Reagan argues that Nicaragua has threatened the security of surrounding nations and the United States. No hard evidence has
They are not freedom fighters; they are murderers and rapists supported by narrow-minded ultraconservatives who see everything in terms of the classic East-West struggle . . .
been found to support that claim. Nicaragua is wracked with high inflation, low costs for its chief commodity exports and heavy bloodshed. It is in no position to practice war, and any incursion into other nations was a result of the harboring of terrorist contras.
ing the United States. We are not attempting to overthrow the governments of any of those nations.
In a last-ditch effort to justify his policies in Nicaragua, Reagan said the country was exporting drugs which poison U.S. youth. However, Mexico supplies the United States with huge amounts of marijuana and heroin, and according to the Globe and Mail of Toronto, the nations of Peru, Bolivia and Colombia produce about 95 percent of the cocaine enter-
Reagan also has cut off any means of a diplomatic solution to the conflict. He suspended talks with Nicaraguan representatives in 1985. The talks were intended to resolve policy differences. His latest negotiating effort was, to say the least, lacking good faith. The president's position is pushing the Sandinistas further into a non-negotiating posture and into the Soviet's waiting arms.
Considering the cost of financing this war and the huge domestic and foreign trade deficits facing the United States, perhaps we would be better served by recognizing the Sardinia government and by helping it develop into a mutually beneficial trade partner. The United States could better help the people of Nicaragua by influencing the government in a friendly diplomatic arena.
The present economic and political realities of the situation in Nicaragua are not favorable for its people. U.S. support of the contrasts will not help form a democracy in that nation. Reagan must stop his lawless activities in Nicaragua and follow his policy in which that nation's government is not under fire simply because it is not aligned favorably with the United States.
Though Reagan and his supporters surely would shake in their simple, self-righteous boots at the thought of this, the time has come for their kind to realize that the rest of the world is tired of having Reagan's morals and ever-changing policies shoved down its throat.
Jon Gregor is a Leavenworth freshman majoring in political science.
V