4
Thursday, September 30, 1993
OPINION
UN I V E R S I T Y D A I L Y K A N S A N
VIEWPOINT
THE ISSUE
Last week the Senate rejected a motion to stop the closing of bases listed by the Defense Base Closure and Realignment Commission.
THE BACKGROUND
Important to getting the commission's work approved was the requirement for President Clinton and Congress to accept or reject the list of bases in its entirety.
THE OPINION
All-or-nothing method useful for reform votes
For once, we cannot complain about government gridlock. The provision requiring Congress to reject or approve the entire list was an effective way of achieving government reform. There was input from all sides, and political games were reduced to a minimum Because of the decision to close bases, however, jobs were to be lost and community businesses catering to soldiers would lose money. It was essential that the process be as fair as possible.
The final list of bases to be closed was the result of input from the four military services, Defense Secretary Les Aspin, a bipartisan commission, local officials President Clinton and finally Congress. Because the President and Congress had to say yes or no to the entire list, there was no room for bargaining on behalf of a lawmaker's own constituency. Many senators voted with the majority on this issue despite the fact their own districts contained bases slated to be closed. No lawmaker wants to be seen destroying work leading to billions of dollars in tax revenue savings for the sake of one military base.
Using an all-or-nothing stipulation might work well in reforming other areas of government. It could greatly reduce the number of restrictive line items attached to budget bills and encourage lawmakers to vote for what is in the best interest of the nation rather than according to their own narrow preferences. That could allow government to move past the rhetoric of reform and toward a government that, as Vice-President Gore's report states, "works better and costs less."
CHRISTINA CORNISH FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
Olympic Committee's selection most qualified
The rejection of Beijing as the host city for the 2000 Olympics was a bold and momentous move by the International Olympic Committee. Human rights violations, a less than adequate infrastructure and the horrendous state of the environment in China cost it the games.
The selection of Sydney, Australia, as the host city for the Games eliminates these problems and legitimizes the importance of logistics over politics. The only weakness that critics have concerning Sydney is the time difference affecting major television markets. Choosing Sydney instead of Beijing was as simple as choosing between a Cadillac and a Yugo.
Although no one will deny that human rights violations exist in every country, the issue is the magnitude of the violations in China. We have instances of mistreatment of individuals in the United States. Germans have to deal with skinheads. But who can explain China's decision to postpone the trial of 15 "counterrevolutionary dissidents" until after the committee made its decision?
The integrity of the Games was preserved with the selection of Sydney. The committee members should be commended for avoiding a potentially disastrous situation.
MANNY LOPEZ FOR THE EDITORIAL BOARD
KANSAN STAFF
where it can catch young people before they commit the crimes, education. It is more important to upgrade our schools so that the first experiences they have with computers and brand-new basketball uniforms isn't in jail. We could only hope that a better education would sway them from crime.
KANSAN STAFF
KC TRAUER, Editor
JOE HARDER, CHRISTINE LAUE
Managing editors
TOM EBLEN
General manager, news adviser
BILL SKEET, Systems coordinator
Editors
Assistant to the editor ...J.R. Clairbome
News ...Stacy Friedman
Editorial ...Terrellyn McCormick
Campus ...Ben Grove
Sports ...kristi Fogel
Photo ...Kip Chin, Renee Knoeber
Features ...Ezra Wolfe
Graphics ...John Paul Fogel
AMY CASEY
Business manager
AMY STUMBO
Retail sales manager
JEANNE HINES
Sales and marketing adviser
Business Staff
Campus sales mgr ...Ed Schager
Regional sales mgr ...Jennifer Perrier
National sales mgr ...Jennifer Evenson
Co-op sales mgr ...Blythe Focht
Production mgrs ...Jennifer Blowey
Kate Burgess
Marketing director ...Shelly McConnell
Creative director ...Brian Fusco
Classified mgr ...Janice Davis
Letters should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 200 words. They must include the writer's signature, name, address and telephone number. Writers affiliated with the University of Kansas must include class and hometown, or faculty or staff position.
Great columns should be typed, double-spaced and fewer than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
The Kansan reserves the right to reject or edit letters, guest columns and cartoons. They can be mailed or brought to the Kansan newsroom, 111 Stauffer-Fint Hall.
Capital punishment sentences fair, essential in curbing crime
This society has a tendency to downplay or ignore the suffering of the victims while portraying the perpetrator in a sympathetic light. "Discovery Journal" suggested that we feel sorry for the convicts. It was a cruel gesture considering the victims and their families were the ones deserving the true sympathy.
Big families provide experience in negotiation, passing the buck
As the announcer of the program proclaimed, "Prison is where society sends its failures." Let's make sure prisoners are being justly punished for the crimes they have committed, that money is being spent on education to prevent more crimes, and that the true victims are not denied the justice they deserve.
On Sept. 12, the program "Discovery Journal" on the Discovery Channel aired an informative yet extremely aggravating episode regarding capital punishment. Although I watch the channel religiously, the pro-convict coverage of the death penalty made me furious.
Anne Balley is a Denver sophomore majoring in psychology.
For those of you who didn't catch the show, it revolved around three inmates on death row complaining how unfair life is for them in jail. These men killed innocent people and ripped families apart, but their sob stories were shoved down the viewers' throats. The last thing I want to hear is three men who have admitted to horrendous crimes complain that society is unfair because they have to die for the crimes they have committed. There is no question of the guilt of these men-nor that they should have thought about the consequences of their actions before they started killing people.
Why shouldn't criminals pay for their crimes? Prison has become an overfinanced retreat that pampers its inmates with access to collegiate libraries, a version of cable television and expensive gymnasiums. Except for the fact that the inmates can't go outside the gates, this doesn't sound like punishment for murder, rape and theft. The judicial and criminal systems need to make nationwide decisions on which crimes deserve capital punishment and administer those verdicts accordingly. The money used to beautify prisons needs to go
I have heard the plea that capital punishment only condones murder, but I find that defense severely lacking. There is a big difference between killing innocent people and killing
In 1976, capital punishment became legal once again in the United States. Currently two-thirds of the states practice the death penalty, and 2,500 people are on death row. Unfortunately, they will spend an average of eight years in jail, spending close to $2 million on appeals. Now, the appeal process is important to a certain extent. It is important not to condemn an innocent person to death, but supporting appeal after appeal from admitted convicts is ludicrous. Who do you think is paying for it? Yes — you, the taxpayer. But realistically, you will pay for it one way or another.
As I've certainly mentioned many times before, large families frighten me. During my life I've enjoyed the luxury of living with a mere four people. This group includes father, sister, brother and brother. It was cozy and there was much food to be eaten. Then my father decided to remarry in the spring. After I got over the fear of my stepmother being evil — because as we see on television, all stepmothers are — I had to deal with the fact that I had three brand-new stepbrothers. Luckily, we moved into a bigger house.
STAFF COLUMNIST
people who deserve the punishment. Besides, the prison these men were stationed in had nicer facilities than my high school. The library and gymnasium were better equipped than most inner-city schools. Does anyone see a problem here? Criminals are being sent to retreat camps, not prisons. I guess I was wrong in assuming that people were sent to prison for punishment.
But what was so aggravating about the program and the convicts was that they were suggesting that they had become victims because society was now unjustly murdering them. If killing them in response to their crimes is the only way to administer adequate punishment, then so be it.
Living with more people took a lot of adjustment, the biggest of which was getting used to the food cabinets being empty the day after a supermarket trip. This was very distressing. However, you learn a lot about the art of "negotiation" in a heavily populated home. This comes in handy when trying to get food, which is in high
STAFF COLUMNIST
demand - especially when it's cooked. One day I returned home to find brother Cary ready to feast on a delicious-looking pizza.
ME: "Hey Cary, I see you made me lunch."
ME: "Yes sir, I've been thinking about eating pizza all day long."
CARY:"Hub?"
ME: "You must have read my mind."
CARY: "Huh?"
CARY: "Huh?"
I then take my prize and reflect on
how easily it was obtained.
You also can observe a lot about the art of debate. One day, there was a showdown at the "TV Corral." Brother Corey was watching a provocative "Brady Bunch" episode when brother Josh changed it. The ensuing "debate" went something like this:
COREY: "Change that back!"
Our new family will take some getting used to. The change requires some adjustments, but not too many. If we do have a problem, it's probably Corey's fault anyway.
JOSH: "No."
COREY: "Change it, you dummy!"
*dontify*
JOSH: "No, stupid." (Note: "stupid" is used as a noun here)
COREY: "You're the one that's
bitting it's sort of an adjective"
cost (now)
Well, you get my drift. If you can't take the heat, you're gonna get burned.
COREY: "YUH-HUH!"
There are many advantages to living in a nine-person home. If you play your cards right, nothing is ever your fault, especially if there are six people
Another of these advantages is that you can always bump chores off on someone else. Unloading the dishwasher, cleaning the kitchen and walking the dog are a thing of the past for this "elder." I just tell Corey to do it. Somebody his wife will surely thank me for helping to shape his household skills.
younger than you. It was funny this summer because whenever anyone did anything wrong, it got blamed on Corey. Of course, now he hates us all. But one day he'll look back on all of this and be glad that we helped him become a tougher person.
Chris Ronan is an Overland Park sophomore majoring in radio T.V. broadcast,
For the Birds
by Jeff Fitzpatrick