4
Tuesday, January 31, 1989 / University Daily Kansan
Opinion
THE UNIVERSITY DAILY KANSAN
Bundy's death no occasion for cheers or profiteering
To those who got a kick out of Ted Bundy's execution last week, you have a lot to be proud of. You turned Bundy's execution into a circus and made yourselves hypocrites. You valued life
execution into a circus and execute into a circus and execution
comedy routines are an instrument used. What kind of message are we sending when we condemn a man for his brutal killings, and then have parties, and turn a profit from his death? The very reason for his execution was to prove that society values life and that there is tragedy in death.
death. How sad it is to look back on our society and see "Burn, Bundy, Burn" T-shirts as the culmination of his execution. How much more noble it would be to see a memorial for murder victims, or grants for the victims' families or even for criminology research.
Believing that justice was served by Bundy's execution does not make anyone inhumane; most hate Bundy for what he did. But to make a mockery of the execution is to make a mockery of the ordeal many went through in their experiences with Bundy.
Death should never be a laughing matter, especially not in this case because of the death Bundy brought with him.
Jennifer Hinkle for the editorial board
Court's misguided decision perpetuates discrimination
The Supreme Court's decision against a Richmond, Va., affirmative action program last week dealt a severe blow nationwide to affirmative action programs and closed the door of opportunity on minority businesses.
The Court's 6-3 decision struck down a Richmond law requiring the primary contractor of any city building to subcontract 30 percent of the value of that project to firms at least one-half minority-owned. The court said such a program qualified as an unlawful form of reverse discrimination because it did not respond to a specific case of discrimination but was simply a blanket measure.
National Urban League. The report points out that during the Reagan era, the nation made "no progress" in reducing the economic disparities between blacks and whites. And, in many ways, those disparities worsened.
But the decision, which allows whites to control fat construction contracts, ignores reality. Consider the conclusions of the "State of Black America, 1899," a report compiled by the National Urban League.
Black families experienced sharp social and economic setbacks during the 1970s and 1980s, the report said. The poverty rate for black families and the number of unemployed blacks increased in 1987. There were three times as many blacks unemployed in 1987 as there were in 1969.
How is reverse discrimination possible when the disparity in representation is so great? Given this time of near economic disaster for black Americans, a law aimed at alleviating the problem should not be shot down.
Yet the ripples from this decision will be felt in the more than 160 local governments with similar programs and in cities investigating the merits of such programs. As a result of the Court's decision, local governments with these programs now will evaluate and possibly eliminate them, basing their decisions on the Court's decision.
reactions on the courts decision.
It is most unfortunate that minority-owned businesses, which can least afford the consequences, will bear the brunt of the decision.
Mark McCormick for the editorial board
decision. No matter what its intent, the decision was a bitter defeat for minority-owned businesses, and it perpetuates discrimination. Unfortunately, as one writer put it, this may be a step toward the kinder, gentler racism we can expect from this conservative Supreme Court.
The editorials in this column are the opinion of the editorial board. The editorials and consists of Julie Adam, Karen Boring, Jeff Euston, James Fearhair, Cindy Harger, Jennifer Hinkle, Grace Hobson, Jill Jess, Mark McCormick and Mark Tillford.
News staff
News staff
Julie Adam...Editor
Karen Boring...Managing editor
Ileen Hesse...News editor
Dile Gruver...Planning editor
James Farquar...Editorial editor
Elaine Sung...Campus editor
Tom Stinson...Sports editor
Janine Swiatkowski...Photo editor
Dave Eamer...Graphics editor
Noel Gerdes...Arts/Features editor
Tom Eblen...General manager, news adviser
Business staff
Debra Cole ...Business manager
Pamela Nance ...Retail sales manager
Kevin Martin ...Campus sales manager
Scott Frager ...National sales manager
Michelle Garland ...Promotion
Brad Lenhart ...Sales development manager
Linda Prokop ...Production manager
Debra Martin ...Asst. production manager
Kim Colenault ...Co-op sales manager
Carl Cressler ...Classified manager
Jeanne Hines ...Sales and marketing adviser
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 staff position.
a) vary in position
b) column titles would be typed, double-spaced and less than 700 words. The writer will be photographed.
c)
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-Flint Hunt Center, two columns and cartoons are the opinion of the writer or Flint Hunt and do not necessarily reflect the views of the University Daily Kansan. Editors, which appear in the left-hand column, are the opinion of the Kansan editorial board.
The University Daily Kansan (USPS 650-640) is published at the University of Kansas, 118 Staffer Floor, Lawrence, Kan. 66045, daily during the regular school year, excluding Saturday, Sunday, holidays and finals periods, and Wednesday through the summer session. Second-class postage is paid in Kansas. Kan. 66044 Annual subscriptions by mail are $50. Student subscriptions are $3 and are paid through the student account. University of Kansas.
subscripter for the 8th and past inclusive, the student activity kit.
Postmaster: Send address changes to the University Dally Kansan, 118
Stauffer-Flint Hall, Lawrence, Kan. 66045.
Reagan era strengthened country
Economic and foreign policies assure him of a place among the great presidents
To put it bluntly, Ronald Reagan should go down in history as one of our nation's great presidents. Surely the best chief executive since Franklin D. Roosevelt to FDR
Roosevelt and quite possibly second only to FDR in this century, Reagan's performance in office has been nothing short of impressive, but
seen nothing. Detractors aound, just as they did in 1981, but it is clear that the United States is much stronger, more vibrant and in better overall shape than when the Reagan Revolution began eight years ago. And much to the dismay of his liberal enemies, a majority of Americans concur with my observations: Witness the 68 percent job-approval rating Reagan enjoyed as George Bush took the oath of office.
Bush took the oath. Many who opposed Reagan have hidden under the sheets during the past eight years, believing that his popularity was due to his speaking ability or some other intangible. But where were the internets when our nation was mired in the post-Carter recession of 1981-82 and Reagan's job approval rating stood at a paltry 43 percent, the lowest second-year rating of any post-World War II president? The fact is, success impressed the American people.
In real terms, Reagan defeated the most pressing problem facing the United States in the early 1980s — inflation. Aided by the Federal Reserve, he helped our nation to six years of economic expansion and 18 million new jobs through
Liberals and the media, often one and the same, have painted Reagan as a lucky incompetent, stumbled his way through two terms of decision. They like to give credit for the numerous successes of the past eight years to anyone and everyone except Reagan. Clearly, though, the fictional rationalizations made by the opposition are just that — fictional.
Christopher Wilson
Staff columnist
Liberals and the media, often one and the same, have painted Reagan as a lucky incompetent who stumbled his way through two terms of indecision They like to give credit for the numerous successes of the past eight years to anyone and everyone except Reagan.
many indexes.
Reagan reintroduced patriotism as something you feel in your heart, a type of bond between man and nation. He made us feel good about ourselves and proud of our country through his unbending confidence in constitutional principles and the people of the United States. That was what we needed in 1981, and that is what we received.
thoughtful tax reductions and a re-emphasis on the private sector. And not surprisingly, Carter's uniety index" is a forgotten factor.
aws and values that guide our foreign in policy, few can dispute the successes
received.
Many conservatives, including me, applaud his stances on abortion, states' rights, affirmative action, and giveaway programs, but what is most satisfying is the conservative makeup of the federal bench and the Supreme Court. This will leave a positive and lasting impact on the basic laws and values that guide our country.
of the Reagan administration. In 1981, Soviet expansion was at full throttle and our national defenses were weak and in disarray. But today, communism is in retreat, relations with the Soviets are positive, and our defenses are again the best in the world. The hard-line stance taken by Reagan with the Soviets, most notably his deployment of the Pershing missiles in Europe, aided dramatically in the signing of the INF treaty, which was the first to reduce nuclear weapons. And although Reagan has an image of using the military as the first option, he actually used our armed forces quite prudently, but also effectively and correctly, in places such as Libya, Grenada and the Persian Gulf.
With Reagan's support, we have seen democracy sprout in several countries. Examples are El Salvador, South Korea and the Philippines. The Reagan administration also actively and rightfully opposed the Sandinists in Nicaragua. The Democratic-controlled Congress clearly undercut his policy, however, leavingiar and dictator Daniel Ortega in power and the Marxist threat to the rest of Central America intact.
Critics view the Reagan years with contempt, pointing to ethical problems, the annual deficits and Iran-contra affair as blatant failures. Few will dispute the merit of those criticisms, but many will argue that Congress bears at least equal responsibility for the spending problems.
But clearly, on the whole, the achievements of President Reagan far outweigh the failures. Anyone who disputes Reagan's place in history need only look at the record.
- Christopher Wilson is an Olafte senior majoring in political science and personnel administration.
Athletes should earn salary, not degree
I seems to me that there is a simple solution to the controversy about let- ing athletes go to college, even though they barely can read and write.
they barely jump. They are in demand because they can dribble a ball behind their backs, slam dunk, leap over a bulking lineman, catch a long pass and perform other physical feats that thrill American sports fans.
Despite what some academic parishes may say, these are valuable skills. Sports fans spend hundreds of millions of dollars a year to watch a 7-footer drop a ball through a hoop or a 300-pounder terrorize quarterbacks. They fill school gymnasiums and stadiums and bring in the big TV contracts.
So they don't read very well. Has a scalper ever charged $50 for a seat in the library?
Universities use the money that athletes generate to finance golf teams, tennis teams, soccer teams, volleyball and other sports programs that fans wouldn't spend a nickel to see.
It's a business deal, pure and simple. But it's an unfair deal because the athletes have little to show for their efforts. They don't earn degrees, and they seldom make it to professional sports, where the real money is.
But is that any reason to keep them out of college or course not. The solution is to be college-educated.
And the first step would be to admit the
Mike
Royko
Syndicated columnist
previous: These under-educated athletes aren't students. They are employees. Their jobs are to entertain the sports fans, to fill the seats and to bring in the big-money TV contracts.
When an academically hopeless student is recruited, he should be paid a fair salary, based on how big of a box office draw he is.
Why do we pretend that it isn't so? Once we stop pretending, we can establish a system that's fair.
on how big of a box office role you are. One of the big complaints about current sports programs is that many of these lads finish their college careers, fail as professional athletes, don't get educations and have nothing to show for their four years.
There's a solution for that problem: a good payroll-savings plan. When the college athlete is paid, half of his earnings should be deducted and put into a safe, interest-bearing fund.
put into a safe, interessed bearer. That way, when he finishes his four years, he'll have a tidy sum stashed away and won't have to go out and start robbing gas stations right away.
Now, I'm not saying that the academically deficient athlete should do nothing but engage in
Obviously, my plan doesn't get to the root of the problem, which is, why these athletes get through eight years of elementary school and four years of high school without learning much.
sports. During the off-season, he should be taught to read, write, do arithmetic and take some speech courses.
They go to schools that are relieved n if graduating senior can read his diploma. If not, they sellit for his being able to spell the name of the school and the street sign outside. That bad is
the school and the street signs.
One of the many reasons the schools are bad is that they have no money. That's not the only reason, but it's one of the major ones.
The whole dispute is ridiculous. As proof, I ask you how many points a game Michael Jordan scores. Right, about 45. Every basketball fan knows that.
this problem.
When these universities come poaching in our urban ghaziabad, they should be made to drop them into our school fund. You want that 270-pound nose tackle? It'll cost you another $50,000.
If they make all-conference, we get a $2,500 bonus. All-American? That's $100,000. Proof I ask.
knows that anyone.
But does anyone in America know what his
final grade point average was?
Louder if Michael knows.
So I offer a modest proposal to help alleviate this problem.
BLOOM COUNTY
■ Mike Royko is a syndicated columnist who writes for the Chicago Tribune.
by Berke Breathed