4
Monday, January 22, 1990 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Roadside waste
Kansas' adopt-a-highway program too costly when compared to Missouri volunteer effort
Adopt-a-highway is the name of a new program that the Kansas secretary of transportation, Horace Edwards, started Dec. 18.
Groups that are chosen to participate in the adopt-a-highway program can see their names on a six foot by one foot sign along the stretch of highway they have adopted. All they have to do is pick up trash along the highway three times a year.
a year. Alvin Kussman, public transportation district office coordinator, said the program was a good way to get citizens involved in public service. He also pointed out that it would save taxpayers money in the long run because highway maintenance crews would not be taking time out of their normal day's work to pick up litter along the highway.
So far so good? Wrong.
So far so good. WRIBING.
Even though the public will not be paying for the pickup of trash along the highways, they will be paying a hefty sum to put up signs proclaiming the adopter of that particular stretch of highway.
Kussman said two signs would be put up on each side of the road per adoption for a total of four signs. One six foot by three foot sign, at the price of $300, would describe the adopt-a-highway program. Below, on the same post, another six foot by one foot sign, costing $123 plus an additional 66 cents per letter, would bear the name or names of the adopters.
Kussman said the signs would be paid for out of the general budget.
A similar program has been successful in Missouri, but its signs are less expensive. The total cost of the signs, including the name of the group, is $200. Charlie Smith, roadside management supervisor for the Missouri board of transportation, said more than 3,100 groups were participating in the program.
Kansas intends to spend too much on the signs. The cost seems even more when compared with the cost of maintenance crews to pick up litter.
pick up letter.
Kussman said that, so far, 200 applications had been sent out to interested groups for the Kansas program. If 200 applicants decided to participate, $169,200 would be spent on signs, not including the 66 cents per letter. The expense of the signs is excessive when compared to the cost of having the equipment workers pick up the litter.
If a top-rated equipment worker, whose starting salary is $10.19 an hour, picked up trash eight hours a week every week for a month, the cost would only come to $4,239.04 a year. That is almost $165,000 dollars less than the cost of 200 signs.
If the price of the signs is not unappealing enough, imagine how the highways would look, littered with all those signs. Every mile or two another adopt-a-highway sign would be posted. It seems the state is getting rid of one type of litter and substituting another.
Yes, clean roadside are nice, but at what expense?
Merceda Ares for the editorial board
Marion Merrell Dow Inc. grant
Corporation shows compassion
Last week Marion Merrell Dow Inc. donated money to the University of Kansas and the University of Missouri-Kansas City to enhance research on the health problems of society's aging population.
The grant of up to $10 million was given to help ensure, through eight post-doctoral fellowships, that the two universities, together with the Kansas City-based pharmaceutical corporation, will be leaders in a field of increasing importance.
With steadily increasing life spans, a continual rise in the number of aging people in the United States and a growing number of problems relating to the health of older people, the expertise through research in this field will benefit both institutions.
This rare, possibly unprecedented, teaming of industry and academic researchers generates great potential in various scientific and social arenas.
The corporation should be congratulated on its insight into social issues and the potential of a partnership with the academic community.
The corporation also should be thanked for giving the two universities the chance to grow stronger and for making the effort to improve life for the area's elderly.
Liz Hueben for the editorial board
LETTERS to the EDITOR Grade proposal deserves support
There is an issue coming before the University Council, that will have a great effect on students and their academic life. On Thursday, Jan. 25, the University Council will vote on a proposal that would require each academic unit to develop and make available to students its procedures for appealing a final course grade.
The Student Senate unanimously passed a resolution in support of this proposal for the following reasons:
The University of Kansas is one of the few Universities without an established, standardized grade appeal system.
Petitions will be available for students to sign expressing their support of the grade appeals proposal. Petitions will be placed on a
The proposal would help reinforce a provision of University Senate Rules and Regulations which strongly suggests that the students be informed in writing of the procedures that the instructor will follow when assigning the final course grade.
table in the Kansas Union Jan. 23 - Jan. 25th. Petitions also will be available in the Student Senate Office on the fourth floor of the Kansas Union.
The proposal would allow a student to appeal a final course grade without filing a charge as serious as academic misconduct. In the proposal, the final course grade would be the only grade that could be appealed.
■ The proposal would allow a student to initiate an appeal of a final course grade if he or she thinks that an instructor did not follow the grading procedure explained to the class.
William N. Sander
University Council
Asst. Presiding Officer
Ad was offensive
During finals week last semester, I noticed a display in the "bus booth" between Wescoe and Watson Library. It was an advertisement which featured pictures of Stalin and Hitler, side by side, with text that drew parallels between the Soviet Union and the Third Reich.
This ignorant and sensational propaganda is offensive in a university atmosphere. Who would stoop to this outdated tactic worthy of Joe McCarthy? The Campus Republicans, of course!
The Soviets are no angels, not by a long shot. But, at a time in which there are broad-sweeping reforms in the Eastern Bloc, and during the very season in which most of the Berlin Wall came down, it is counterproductive to continue pushing the buttons which agitate a fear of a monolithic Communist threat in the misinformed.
Moreover, it is ironic that the Campus Republicans would cultivate a fear of an imaginary Commi/Nazi alliance when it has been repeatedly evidenced that the GOP has many ties to fascists, Nazis, war criminals and other undesirables, One of these alliasies surfaced during the Bush campaign, exposing his party's ongoing relationship with the fascist elements of the Heritage Groups Council. Anybody heard of Yarasol Stetsko? (See Village Voice, Nov. 1, 1988, "Nazis and the GOP")!
Jeff Listerman
Lawrence Junior
News staff
Richard Brack...Editor
Daniel Nilman...Managing editor
Christopher R. Relaton...News editor
Lisa Moss...Planning editor
John Milburn...Editorial editor
Candy Niemann...Campus editor
Mike Considine...Spores editor
E. Joseph Zurga...Photo editor
Stephen Kline...Graphics editor
Kita Bergquist...Art/Features editor
Tom Ebbin...General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Margaret Townsend...Business manager
Tami Rank...Retail sales manager
Misey Miller...Customer经理
Kathy Stolte...Regional sales manager
Mike Johnson...National sales manager
Mindy Morla...Co-op sales manager
Nate Stamos...Production manager
Mind Lund...Assistant production manager
Carole Slaina...Marketing director
James Glesenpp...Creative director
Janet Rotholm...Chairman
Wendy Stirk...Teacherless manager
Wendy Stirk...Sales and marketing adviser
be photographed. They reserve the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 113 Flautist-Staff Hail. Letters, columns and cartoons are the opinion of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University Dial Kansas. Editors 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 Kassaa, please include class and homeown, or faculty or staff position. Guest columns should be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The writer will
last week, hundreds of KU students were hoodwinked out of rights.
Census form takes away student rights
The con artist was the state of Kansas. The modus operandi was the 1900 Census adjustment form every KU student had to complete when paying fees.
Of the 20 students I spoke to last week, only one understood the census form or its purpose. A few said they thought it had something to do with taxes or tuition payments. Do most simply shrugged or said they didn't know.
Don't get me wrong. I am not blaming the students. The instructions were incomprehensible. More importantly, the instructions did not address the consequences of the different options from which students had to choose.
Many students that I watched, checked the "No" box on line four, indicating they did not want their college addresses considered their permanent residences for the purpose of representation in the Kansas Legislature. Several of these students said they thought by checking "No," they would be counted
Dave Wakefield Staff columnist
back in their dear old hometowns. For Kansas students, this is true. We can only hope that students' hometown legislators will do as good a job representing their concerns as legislators from districts containing Regents schools have been doing.
But out-of-state students who checked "No" on line four soon will lose representation at the state level, simply cease to be represented at the state level.
You see, all but four states use the federal census to apportion their legislative districts. The federal census will count students where they are living on April 1, 1990. For most KU students, this will be Lawrence. In fact, the federal census instructs parents not to list children away at college as members of the household.
Kansas also will use the federal census, but will adjust its state census for students who checked "No" on line four. Those with a Kansas permanent address will be counted in their hometowns. Out-of-state students who checked "No" will simply be dropped. Because no other state adjusts for students, no other state will add them. Kansas won't even send a notice to other states informing them about those students who tried in vain to remain loyal to their homes. In short, they won't get their fair share of state representation back home and they won't get any in Kansas.
You might think that because Kansas is so concerned about counting students where they have their permanent residence, it would try to count Kansans studying in other states. Sort of an absentee census form perhaps. But no such effort will be made. Fortunately for those Kansans, other states, other cities and other equal representation. Nice of them to make our “residents” feel welcome. Too bad Kansas won't return the favor.
Even illegal aliens are counted for the federal census and are given equal representation in Congress. II-
legal aliens will be represented in the Kansas legislature because no effort will be made to subtract them. But not out-of-state students who checked "No."
When the 1992 state legislature is apportioned, thousands of out-of-state students at the 50 colleges and universities in Kansas will not be considered. Fewer legislators will be apportioned to their districts. Fewer voices will speak out for student rights and student issues in the state capitol. With fewer voices and fewer votes representing college populations, programs of interest to students and university employees will certainly face tougher fights in the legislature.
If you think you made the wrong choice, you still have time to change your mind. Write to the Secretary of State's office, 2nd floor, State Capitol, Topeka, Kan., 66612. Tell him you want to change your census adjustment questionnaire. Tell him you want equal representation in the state legislature.
Dave Wakefield is a Lawrence senior majoring in journalism.
Consider death penalty in boy's death
Perhaps you do not believe in the death penalty. It is possible for people of good will to disagree on this issue.
Please read this, though, and see how you feel. Because on Thursday in Chicago, Criminal Court Judge Michael Getty is scheduled to pass sentence on Johnny Campbell, 40, and Alicia Abraham, 28, for the August 1987 murder of Abraham's son, Lattice McGee, 4. The mother was found guilty of the crime last week; earlier Campbell, who was her boyfriend, had entered a plea of guilty.
According to testimony, Campbell moved in with Alicia Abraham earlier in 1987. Lattie and his older brother, Cornelius, who was 6 at the time, were living with their mother.
The months of torture for the two boys started when Johnny Campbell noticed that the 4-year-old had a high-pitched voice. On this basis, he accused Lattie of being offenable. According to testimony, Campbell
Bob Greene
Syndicated columnist
Access letter or using Campbell
According to testimony, Campbell
began to beat the little boy with fists and sticks. He burned him with cigarettes and an iron, repeatedly stuck him with sewing needles, dunked him by his legs in scalding water, and — as a routine punishment — left him hanging upside down in a locked, darkened closet for hours on end, often overnight.
Key testimony came from the older brother, Cornelius, who is now 8. Cornelius said that he, too, was tortured and burned.
At one point, he testified how Johnny Campbell had placed a hot iron directly on Lattie's chest. Under questioning from Assistant State's Attorney James Bigoness, Cornellus
how Campbell would bind Lattice's hands and ankles. He told of seeing his little brother hanging upside down from the clothes rack in the closet, with his wrists tied and his face taped. His brother was bleeding, he said.
On the night before Lattice died, testimony showed, Johnny Campbell stuffed a rag in the little boy's mouth to keep him quiet and taped potato peeledings over his eyes so that he could not see. Then he hung the boy upside down in the closet overnight.
in the morning — according to what the mother told police investigators — she did not check on her son in the closet. Instead, she watched "The Incredible Hulk" on television.
At this point, Campbell — apparently angered by the boy's weakness — punched him in the ear. Lattie collapsed and did not move. When he was pronounced dead at South Shore Hospital, authorities found scars and fresh wounds from
And on Thursday, Judge Getty is scheduled to pass sentence on Campbell and Abraham. He has considerable discretion in the selection of a penalty, with the death penalty a possibility for both of them.
Prosecutor Bigoness said of Johnny Campbell and Alicia Abraham: "This is the worst case imagery that's it's a special place for them."
the top of his head to the bottoms of his feet.
Perhaps you do not believe in the death penalty. People of good will can agree on the issue.
What possible justification could there be for permitting these two people to continue living among human beings?
but if in this case you do disagree — if you oppose the execution of Johnny Campbell and Alicia Abraham — please be good enough to answer one question:
> Bob Greene is a columnist for the Chicago Tribune.
CAMP UHNEELY
BY SCOTT PATTY
2