10
Friday, April 8, 1977
University Daily Kansan
Comment
Opinions on this page do not necessarily reflect the views of the University of Kansas or the School of Journalism.
Winn's bill a loser
Among the paper to be cast on the floor of the U.S. House of Representatives this week is the CIA Disclosure Bill whose intent is to punish those flies who tell the other bad guys who our bad guys are.
Corsponseed by Rep. Larry Winn Jr., R-Kan, the bill would "reduce the grave danger already faced by our intelligence agents" and "take assertive action to protect the lives of our intelligence personnel."
NOT A bad idea, really. Intelligence gathering, provided it is at least halfway legal, is a legitimate governmental activity. It's self defense.
The problems arise out of the penalties to be imposed on any would-be big mouth who ratted on his buddies at the CIA or other intelligence-gathering agencies.
The particulars of the bill, as stated in one of Winn's numerous press released, say: "This bill will provide up to 10 years in prison and a $10,000 fine for any person who has the identity of any person who at anytime has been engaged in intelligence activities.
"in the case of any agency employee or ex-employee who has pledged secrecy, the bill stipulates the prosecutors must prove only that the disclosure was made 'willingly.'
"... For all other persons, the prosecutor must prove that the identification was made with the awareness that the consequences may threaten the safety of the particular agent . . ."
WE RUN into legal trouble immediately
How does a prosecutor prove that identification was made? What constitutes a "hint"—a wink? Perhaps a nod. Three knocks on the door: Or is it four?
Similarly, how can a prosecutor prove that disclosure was made willingly, with full awareness of the consequences to the agent, or both? If one is of a psychological bent, one could fairly claim that human actions—all human actions—are intentional; we act the way we want to, harmful or not. If that premise is correct, any disclosure is then必然会 willingly, so the entire point becomes meaningless. And unless one claims claimovacy, or has proven such, full awareness is a mental and mathematical impossibility.
WINN FURTHER contends that his bill imposes no prior restraint—preventing the media from publishing in advance, a violation of the First Amendment—but adds that, similar to libel law, publishers or broadcasters can be held responsible for their actions after publication or broadcast.
As some news editor knows, known punishment after-the-fact often is more than enough to discourage publication before.
Winn has made a serious attempt to prevent the sort of identification that led to the death of CIA agent Richard Welch in Athens last year. His bill is an attempt to inject a bit of legal aphrodisiac into an already impotent CIA.
But if such a law is to be passed, it must be made clear, definitive and positive instead of fuzzy, inconclusive, neutral and probably impossible to enforce.
Baseball fans prepare
Rrrrhm-ryn-rrrem! Rr-rhn-ryn-rr-en!
Ryh -rh t-rhsn -ryh -thr -rrtsn -rrhm!
Rrrrhm! ROYALS!
That, or something similar, is what a large group of uniformed service station operators are going to be chanting on Kansas City television commercials any day now. (The translation is something like 'Pound 'em Royals, pound 'em.')
Anyway, what we're getting at in a rather roundabout way is that baseball season has begun. And on Monday, the Royals open the home season against the hated New York Yankees. Damn Yankees.
Baseball has been having some troubles lately. To the continuing problems of competition from allegedly more exciting (and definitely more violent) sports such as football and hockey, astronomical salaries and a bad image problem of greediness have been added.
But the game survives. And while it survives, a tradition lives on, and loyal fans persevere. Until September or so, games instead of money will dominate the sports pages. And, until then, baseball will be fun again.
RRR-RRmH-ROYALS!
College voters misunderstood
"Oh my God! They've given the students the right to vote."
Those were the words at the top of a flier that arrived on my doorstep Monday afternoon, less than 12 hours before the polls in Lawrence city election were to open.
The flier, which primarily emphasized the need to vote for the proposed change in the law, said that Judge Garland talked to a jackass that was wearing a suit. The words were displayed so they were easy to be attributed to Miss Garland.
THE LEAFTET obviously was designed to inflame student voters enough to vote in Tuesday's election. Unfortunately, it wasn't too effective. But even if it had been, it wouldn't have altered the results of the election.
There are two distinct groups in this community that have
conflicting ideas about whether the students who are registered in Douglas County should vote. One group, we will call
BOTH ARE wrong about the student vote. Neither are
den of drugs, dirty jeans and economic iniquity.
the "power to the people" group, thinks the students should take an active part in the problem of climate change in Lawrence. By taking an active role, the students could change the social and economic framework of this community, power to the people group think.
The other group, which we will call the "damm college kids," is active in damm college kids are active in local politics, the city will be
Brent Anderson Editorial Writer
cognizant of the collective wisdom of the students at the University of Kansas, especially of those students who
Barkley Clark, professor of law and leader in the city commission race, represents a community general, had an unfounded fear of the potential college voters. Students should take a more active roll, Clark said, and if they understand a community would benefit.
Clark calls the relationship between the University and the rest of the community the town-gown relationship. There has been a good relationship between town and university, and the students have made a positive contribution to that relationship.
THAT CONTRIBUTION isn't what the power to the people or the damn college kids groups think it is. It is a contribution that demonstrates a unique interest in Lawrence, in Tuesday's election, for example, those precincts thought to have a majority of college students were reflective of the final election results.
The filer, which probably hurt more than helped the cause of those persons who passed it out, insisted that the law's attitude of the Lawrence
business community toward students voters.
There is very little evidence that those interests are afraid of the student vote, and if they are, they needn't be.
"There is nothing the Lawrence real estate, banking and business interests fear the student vote. Our students read the fly read."
The students who voted in the local elections are interested in the future of Lawrence, I think, and vote accordingly. The students who don't vote in the local elections are interested in their business, which in some cases it isn't, or really aren't interested.
Were student interest to increase, as Clark thinks it should, I think the power to the people and the damn couple was increased. We should be surprised at the positive results such interest would have.
Carter's rights stand defended; Wolfe assailed
To the editor:
The Kansan's editorial on Tuesday, April 5, about President Carter's human rights policy did an excellent job of oversimplifying a very complex situation. The inference that Carter's statements on human rights will be nothing more than political rhetoric should not themselves to all the world's atrocities is somewhat bewildering.
The result has been the unfortunate necessity of selective enforcement of the Helsinki
about Atty. Gen. Curt Schneider.
morality is unrealistic and dangerous. A foreign policy prudently tempered with
President Carter, in an effort to reaffirm the United States' commitment to certain ideals, has followed a course that has lent a bit more integrity to America's global position. It also has contributed to economic and military posture. The previous approach to American foreign aid was completely divorced from any sort of human rights principle. The current approach to such aid is linked to human rights considerations only when they are being beaten or detriment to America's strategic position.
Bemis would have us believe
Couple coupled with a deluge of self-righteous cries of hypocrisy. The fact of the matter is that the United States is a good deal less hypocritical than many countries few years before. Before the Carter administration, the State Department vilified the decency of every American by totally abandoning the distribution of foreign aid. Now, however, while we still must tolerate the abhorrent conditions of a South Korea or an Iran, we can take care to ensure that the ideals we aspire to are being applied where realistically possible. With respect to human rights, we now practice some of what we preach, whereas when we did not practice any of it.
The only significant letter was the short letter of Del Shankel, executive vice
For Carter to zealously impose the Helsinki provisions on all nations equally would be international suicide. As long as we reside in a world that is stabilized by military respect, we cannot afford to impose moral sanctions on all of our repressive allies. A foreign policy dogmatically dictated by
Readers Respond
morality is necessary and welcome.
Jeffery Byrd
Jenery Byrd Chicago, Ill., senior
Editorial left holes To the editor:
Upon reading Jay Bemis' editorial entitled "Kansas Republicans Threatened," I became bewildered as to how he could write an editorial leaving so many unanswered questions.
It is true, Democrats do control the Kansas House for the first time in 64 years. But what have they done with it?
The excuse in the past for unresponsive terms were that they were a minority party. But even now since they control the majority their unresponsiveness has continued.
Bemis points his attacks on a Republican leader's comments
that Schneider was just *u* beating the bushes and walking across hot coals all the way across the state to protect poor, unsuspecting senior citizens from consumer fraud. If this doesn't Schneider's only motivation he would deserve congratulations.
But they start now, after six men from the Democratic state committee have declared him the governor in next year's election.
But why have these trips only recently started? Were they not just as necessary during his first two years in office?
Three of the men named were Terry Scanlon, Democratic state chairman; Norbert Dreling, former state chairman; and Schuster himself, who declared himself a candidate.
Bernis didn't mention this meeting in his editorial. To refresh memories, it was talked up in March 22 editorial in the Kanusan.
I don't intend this letter to sound like a paranoid Republican which Benn refers to; instead, I feel that facts should be told when editorials are written.
Having read Valerie Voigt's letter in the Monday edition of the Kansas, then the critical responses which appeared in it helped me wish to express some opinions on all of this correspondence.
Without this, the Attorney General's office will have to send representatives around the city to cites citizens from editorial fraud.
Center criticized
To the editor:
Mark Stucky,
Co-organizational chairman,
KU College Republicans
chancellor. If Voigt's letter had been more timely, then Shankel's comment would be much easier for her usage of his name, this may or may not be applicable, except it would raise the question of whether he go over Paul Wolfe's head to accomplish something?
Voigt is not a politician, nor is she subject to the internal political games of the University. Her own case, referred to in her letter and referred to in Kramer's letter, is before Shankal presently. It is my hope that Voigt perseveres with the knowledge of University politics, and the Kanans' "questionable" printing of her letter, doesn't affect her case.
As for Ray Kramer's letter, he mentions that this is the second letter written by Voigt criticizing of Olfer the Computer Center. He goes on to say that she was dismissed from the Computation Center for unsatisfactory job performance (whatever means), and may needate supervise, Jeff Bangert, and Nifford, assistant director and part of the management team of the Computation Center, both disagreed with Olfer's Wolfe's decision and his alone that brought about her dismissal.
To correct both Nordlund and Kramer, many people who have resigned from the Computation Center have done so. I am a Volg. These comments are reflections of the words and feelings of the people involved, not the "management team," I tend to believe that the Center employees before I believe Wolfe, Nordlund or Kramer.
The quality of service and
lack of productive output from the Computation Center in the past years is not because of the lack of management, because of no management. Current service at the Computation Center is much improved over service at this location, and because of the new "structured environment"; this is because a computer system nearly four times the size and far more complex handling the load was installed.
Considering that a new computer system is installed, and a new building is in progress, the "structured" environment would be the cause for those who would leave, to stay. Indeed it was for many who weathered the long journey to KU, loyality to KU, but because of the potential to grow with KU. Those who left were discouraged because after the hard work they put into the construction process, they felt duned.
Finally, Wolfe's chances of winning were statistically improbable. When you finish fourth in a race for six positions, you have to finish fourth when only three can be the winners, it doesn't
convince the voter Alexander Barket, Jr.
cut the mustard. A job of convincing the voters has to be done to overcome the "humor" he generates, if he didn't convince the voters.
Letters Policy
Lawrence special student
Letters to the editor are welcomed but should be typewritten, double-spaced and bold. All letters in words are edited and may be condensed according to space limitations and the editor's judgments. KU students must include; KU students must provide their academic standing and hometown; and KU students must provide their position; others must provide their address.
Alum vs. Title IX
To the editor:
KU Student Body President
Steve Leben has brought up an important point when he asks whether it is the students' or the teachers' role to bring KU under the requirements of Title IX by July 1978.
First of all, let me say that I am strongly against many of the Title IX provisions. This "equal funding" it is by carrying things a bit too far; women's athletics simply cannot bring in enough revenue to even begin to support their programs. I am so-
ardent KU alumnus, but I wouldn't think of spending two hours in Allen Field House watching a women's intercollegiate basketball game. Frankly speaking, they are about as interesting as an Ida Lapino film festival.
However, I do believe that women should have the opportunity to compete at college level and I don't think that the student activity fees should be allocated toward this. My two sons currently attend KU, and I feel their fees are too high already.
If our university is to be forced to come into line with the Title IX requirements, it should be the University's responsibility and not the students' burden.
Rug
Roy Earle, M.D.
9421 Sierra Lane
Overland Park
The K the first with the The ga ternoon
The K Eight I State w in the t were i Injur hampen teh m will als
Managing Editor
Greg Hack
Jim Hates
Editorial Editor
Stewart Brann
In its Univer-
hosts
Stephen triangi
alvam
KU
triangi
week i
365, in had
boles.
the
after
Grea
Wich
635
Okla
e 58%
Published at the University of Kansas daily August 18, 2014
Subscriptions to the Daily and daily event Saturday and Sunday, Holiday Edition, and daily evening Saturday and Sunday, Holiday Edition, are subscriptions by mail or a $1 commission on $18.
A year ago the student government issued a year ago mandate the county. Student subscriptions increase in percentage.
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Editor
Urs Wales
Kl
Campus Editor
Alson Gwinn
K
Associate Campus Editor
Assistant Campus Editors
Copy Chefs
Sports Editor
Associate Sports Editors
Photo Editor
Make Up Editors
Mary Myers
Wise Editors
Lynda Smith
Barbara Rosewine
Bernel Johnson
Purr Prewell
Gary Vee
Dana Domingo
Courtney Thompson
Mike Campbell
Jay Koehler
Marion Thomas
Suan Appleh
Ann Signman
Dervish Vornil
Larry Bonucci, Carla Lumlun
Ellen Wiley
Bill Uiyeko
Contributing Writers
Ball Sniffen, Barbara Rousewine
Editorial Writers
Jay Bensu, Paul Jefferson
Er at E
Business Manager James Clements
Advertising Manager Tim O'Mahon
An assistant Advertising Manager Randy Harbe
Randy Harbe
Assistant Classified Manager Pat Thomson
Dennis Doherty
National Advertising Manager Brian Gardner
Natural Advertising Manager Brian Gardner