4
Tuesday, March 6, 1990 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Alumni gifts to athletes Bill would lead to slack policing of programs encourage schools to ignore alumni incentives
If the Legislature has its way, the University
will be absolved of its responsibility to monitor the activities of alumni who want to give cars and cash to athletes.
State Sen. Mike Johnston, D-Parsons, has introduced a bill that would allow Kansas universities to sue people who cause the schools to violate NCAA rules. The bill would allow universities to sue for lost television revenues and ticket sales caused by NCAA sanctions. The bill would exempt coaches university employees, NCAA employees and students.
The bill also would take pressure off universities to oversee their programs as far as alumni are concerned. The legislation has good intentions but invites trouble.
With little to lose, universities could look the other way as wealthy alumni offered athletes inducements to attend. If the alumnus gets caught and the NCAA punishes the school, then the university can cry foul and sue the alumnus for lost revenue.
The only thing the university loses is integrity, which it gains back after serving its time on probation. Losing scholarships and post-season opportunities could be assigned a monetary value and be recovered from guilty alumni. The university would be in an almost no-lose situation, taking the benefits of under-the-table payments without the risk.
Moreover, the state law would be difficult to enforce outside of its borders. Alumni in other states would be exempt, for all intents and purposes. It would be next to impossible for the universities to collect on a lawsuit.
Certainly no school can be aware of every action of its alumni. It is also unfair that a school is punished for a transgression in which it played no part. However, universities must make every effort to police its programs and ensure that they comply with NCAA regulations. This includes making sure players are not accepting illegal donations from alumni. Universities could become lax in their oversight if the threat of monetary loss is removed.
Daniel Niemi for the editorial board
Members of the editorial board are Richard Brack, Daniel Niemi, Christopher R. Ralston, John P. Milburn, Liz Hueben, Cory S. Anderson, Angela Baughman, Andres Caveller, Chris Evans, Stephen Kline, Camille Krehbiel, Melanie Matthes, Jennifer Metz and Scott Patty.
Lower tuition rates
Program would cut fees, promote education
The Kansas Senate needs to seriously consider joining the Midwestern Higher Education Compact, a program that would lower tuition rates for some out-of-state students.
The bill, introduced last week, would increase students' access to institutions in the region. It would allow student exchanges between institutions in specialized programs, strengthen educational programs and encourage resource-sharing among institutions.
The compact would benefit a student who wanted to take a specialized course at another institution at lower tuition costs.
The legislation could lower tuition fees for out-of-state students to that of in-state tuition or at least to 150 percent of in-state tuition. No specifics have been set for lower tuition costs.
At least five of the 12 Midwestern states would have to join the compact by 1995 for it to take effect. The states eligible for the compact
are Kansas, Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Michigan,
Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, North Dakota,
Ohio, South Dakota and Wisconsin.
In this era of rapidly expanding technology, equipment is costly, and institutions would benefit if resources were shared. All schools would not have to buy the same equipment, and students could use the existing techology more effectively.
It is the perfect time for the Senate to pass the bill. Institutions in the Midwest can no longer afford to be decades behind the rest of the country.
The compact has an estimated budget of $58,000 a state for the first two years, the minimum amount the compact could ask for.
Senate should realize the need of an agreement among the institutions; the compact would broaden educational opportunities for students.
Effects of Nicaraguan elections exaggerated
Andres Caveller for the editorial board
John Milburn was correct on one point in Wednesday's editorial about the Nicaraguan elections. The elections
did accomplish in one day something that the United States has failed to do in ten years of support for the contras: the betrayal of a revolution.
Contrary to the editorial's claim, however, the Nicaraguan people did not repudiate Daniel Ortega and the Frente Sandinista de Liberación Nacional (FSLN) with a single, clear voice. The Nicaraguan people did not realize "that the Sandinista regime was just as repressive as that of the dictator Rafael Trujillo," and did not choose Violeta Chamorro and her United States-financed coalition because they believed the United Opposition Union was any more committed to democracy and human rights than the Sandistas.
The majority of Nicaraguan voters chose Chamorro and the United National Opposition (UNO) because they were exhausted by ten long years of war and privation. War and privation that were caused in large part by the United States-supported contras and the United States-imposed trade embargo.
Liz Maggard
Guest columnist
What the Nicaraguan people did realize was that the United States' hostility toward the Sandinista Front would prolong their agony.
The Nicaraguan people were forced to choose between their revolutionary ideals and their own survival.
The outcome of Nicaragua's elections rep resents neither a great triumph for democracy nor a vindication of U.S. policy. All it proves is that, if you maim and kill enough people, and starve people long enough, you can get your candidate elected.
The only winner Sunday was low-intensity conflict. It certainly was not a victory for the Nets, who lost by 3-2.
Nevertheless, the election results do represent the will of the Nicaraguan voters, and as such should be accepted and met with
` appropriate responses.
The U.S. government's most appropriate response is to respect the dignity and sovereignty of the Nicaraguan people and support their attempts toward national reconciliation. U.S. officials should refrain from actions or words that endanger such healing.
President Bush was quoted after the elections as saying, "For years, the Nicaraguan people suffered; today, the people have spoken." Considering the role the United States has played in defending, such a comment is particularly indelicate, insensitive and counterproductive.
So is the Kansas's warning that the United States must be skeptical of the Sandistas' promise to honor the election and relinquish power peaceably.
The claim that the FLSN has a history of broken promises is an old dog that won't hurt. It is just the sort of self-serving rhetoric resulted in ten years of Nicaraguan tragedy.
The truth is, the Sandinistas have created the foundation for something no other political entity in Nicaragua — or even the U.S. Marines — have managed: the country's
first democratic transfer of government.
The FSLN is not going to just dry up and blow away, no matter how much the United States might want it to. The Sandinista Front is still the largest political party in Nicaragua, and received 41 percent of the votes in the presidential election (a clear voice!). With at least 38 seats, the FSLN will be the most powerful single-party bloc in the Nicaraguan national assembly.
The Sandistas will continue to wield considerable influence in Nicaragua and still be around for the next set of elections in six years. They will remain an active force in the country. The SLN states will have to deal with the FSLN realistically and congenially sooner or later.
There is one thing the United States should be skeptical of: the coalition it created to oppose the Sandinista Front. The UNO is an ungainly collection of argumentative factions (ranging from ultra-right conservatives to communists and socialists) who can agree only on their hatred of the Sandinistas. The UNO has shown no aptitude for collective governing, nor has it demonstrated any inclination for democratic reforms.
If it can keep from unraveling long enough to carry out any of its campaign promises, the UNO will in fact set democracy back at least ten years in Nicaragua.
For instance, the UNO's platform calls for an end to the land redistribution program instituted by the Sandistas. Land reform has afforded Nicaragua campesinos their first real opportunity to escape the oligarchical structure to which they were subservient before 1979. The proposal to halt such a beneficial program does not represent democratic progress. Instead, it is a retreat into the discredited politics of the past.
Meanwhile, the United States has a moral obligation to provide financial aid, technical assistance and other such support as is necessary for Nicaragua's social and economic survival. The U.S.' government's first priority must be to pressure the contras into disbanding immediately.
The United States has succeeded in defeating the FSLN — temporarily. But at what cost to the Nicaraguan people and at what cost to our own democratic principles?
▶ Liz Maggard is program coordinator for Latin American Solidarity.
LETTERS to the EDITOR 'Hawks still OK
After watching the Kansas-Oklahoma basketball game Feb. 27, at first I felt embarrassed for the team, coach and staff, and myself for being a KU student. But that only lasted a minute. The Kansas basketball team has nothing to be ashamed of, even after its loss to Oklahoma. So maybe they didn't play as well as the other team or even make as many points; but as a team, they displayed an honorable amount of good sportsmanship and spirit for the game.
Some fair-weather fans are now claiming that the team "reached its peak" too early in the season, that Kansas won too early and too many times, giving the team a false amount of confidence. Whether Kansas wins or loses should not determine the caliber of the team, but rather the way in which the team displays sportsmanship throughout the season. Roy Williams and his staff have coached and represented the team in more than a commendable manner. I am proud to be a Kansas fan, whether they win or lose, and I hope the players continue to keep their heads high.
Carol Ann Drees Leawood sophomore
News staff
Richard Breck ... Editor
Daniel Nieml ... Managing editor
Christopher R. Relaton ... News editor
Timing Manage ... Planning editor
John Milburn ... Editorial editor
Candy Niemml ... Campus editor
Mike Coordination ... Photo editor
E. Joseph Zurge ... Photo editor
Stephen Kline ... Graphics editor
Kris Berguelt .. Art/Features editor
Tam Earle ... General editor
Margaret Townsend...Business manager
Tami Rank...Retail sales manager
Miles Miller...Campus sales manager
Kathy Rollins...National sales manager
Mike Lehman...National sales manager
Mindy Morris...Co-op sales manager
Nate Stamos...Production manager
Mindy Lund...Assistant product manager
Carrie Stainka...Marketing director
James Gleannapp...Creative director
Jamie Rorholm...Classified manager
Wendy Steward...Financial advisor
Jeanne Hines...Sales and marketing adviser
Business staff
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newspaper, 111 Staffer-Fall H. Hall. Letters, columns and cartoons are the opinion of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University Daily Kansan. Editorials are the opinion of the Kansan editorial board.
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and less than 200 words and must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. If the writer is affiliated with the University of Kansas, please include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position. Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The writer will include your contact information.
Shabazz omission regrettable, not racist
The caller was angry. "The editors of the Kansan are racist," he said.
He refused to give his name, but the apparent source of his anger was that the Kansan's daily On Campus listings had not included a speech by his brother Malcolm X. He was upset that he had missed the event.
Shabazz made her speech on a Friday night. The call came on a Monday, the same day the Kansan published a Page One photo of Shabazz and a story about her speech on Page 3.
"I depend on the Kansan to keep me informed about what is happening on this campus. The only assumption I can make from this is that the omission was intentional and the omission of the Kansan are racist," he said.
Similar complaints are not uncommon around here. It's no secret that the Kansan community has many complaints. Many complaints are about omissions from or mistakes in
Richard Brack
Editor
the calendar and On Campus listings. The calls usually don't get under my skin the way this one did.
It bothered me for two reasons:
First, the Kansan has invested money and energy to properly cover and be sensitive to all groups on campus.
February was Black History Month. If you go back through the Kansans published last month, you will notice a great amount of coverage devoted to special Black History Month events. There were also many special educational features, including a page about the changing role of Blacks in the arts, profiles of Black leaders in history and editorial page support of the month and the idea behind it. It hurt a bit to be accused of
racism while that kind of effort was under way. But that still wasn't what really got to me.
It has become increasingly popular to accuse people and institutions of racism. In a phrase that I have come to disdain, it is "politically correct." If someone or something does not say or do the right thing or displays the wrong attitude toward minority groups, that person or institution can easily be branded racist. Usually the target has no chance to respond to the charges. And the charges usually will stick.
I guess racism is tough to define. In the way the Kansan was accused of it by the caller, it could not really be touched, felt or smelled. It was something insidious but unreal. Those are some of the reasons it is tough to defend against such charges.
Sure, the Kansan forgot to put the Shabaz listing in On Campus. A mistake? Yes. Our fault? Yes. Racist? No.
Of course there is racism on this campus. Unfortunately that disease still flourishes here and elsewhere. There are reasons to be concerned about racism, sexism and all the other dangerous “isms.” But spurious charges for no reason other than to make accusations do far more harm than good. Soon, as in the fable about the young shepherd who cried wolf, those who are concerned will cease to listen.
In the face of such charges, those who had been willing to discuss racism will shy away, afraid that a misunderstood turn of phrase or observation will be interpreted as racist. If public discourse stops, so will progress toward a fair, non-racist campus, nation and world.
Because while baseless charges of racism are flung happily about by those who delight in taking offense at every misstep, many real racists continue to spread hatred and ignorance.
CAMP UHNEELY
> Richard Brack is a Great Bend senior majoring in journalism.
BY SCOTT PATTY
SPEND SPRINGBREAK IN
SUNNY KANSAS CITY!!! $1.75 ONLY
*WHY GO TO THE BEACH OR TO THE MOUNTAINS*
*WHEN YOU CAN GET DRINK IN THE CITY OF*
*FLOWTAINS*
ARRIVE IN K.C. 3P.M. SATURDAY
V