100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 05, 1967 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1967-02-05

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.


Seventy-Sixth Year
EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHTGAN
UNDER AUTHORITY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS

SPERSPECTIVES
Washington View: No Peace Hopes
By HARVEY WASSERMAN

4

Where Opinions Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH.
Truth Will Prevail

NEWS PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials Printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints.

SUNDAY, FEBRUARY 5, 1967

NIGHT EDITOR: MICHAEL HEFFER

i

Need More Tax Dollars

THE STATE OF MICHIGAN just doesn't
seem to care enough to buy the very
best, at least not when it comes to educa-
tion.
The governor's budget recommendation
for the University in the next fiscal year
is $12.4 million short of the amount re-
quested by the Regents. You, the stu-
dent, will pay the price for this fiscal
austerity in larger classes taught by un-
derpaid professors, and, perhaps, in high-
er tuition, if the administration decides
that $12.4 million in expenditure cutbacks
is more quality than it can afford to sac-
rifice in one year.
THE UNIVERSITY has consistently
taken flak from Lansing during the
last decade. Several years ago, in the days
of payless paydays and a major state fi-
nancial crisis, the University and other
institutions held their budgets constant
while the state bailed itself out. Despite
pleas from educators, these losses have
never been made up.
Unlwilling to even seriously consider a
badly needed income tax until this year,
the state has generally taken a "sorry,
we don't have the money attitude" and
then placidly declined to make any effort
to find it. After all, higher taxes would
alienate a few constituents. God forbid!
Every state appropriation for the past
few years has been significantly short of
the Regents' request, and, believe it or
not, University budget requests are not
bargaining positions but accurate esti-
mates of minimum needs.

THE BUDGETING PROCESS starts with
requests from department chairmen,
which are then pared down by the dean
of each school and college, and then sent
to the administration building, where the
budgeteers take out their scalpels and
slice off some more. The $16.5 million
appropriation increase asked by the Re-
gents this year is less than 75 per cent
of the amount the deans felt absolutely
essential to maintain quality in their
schools.
Though an institution can withstand a
low state allocation once or twice, inade-
quate financial support over a period of
years inevitably takes a serious toll on
any university, and it has proved costly
to this one.
For example, this year's budget request
points out that the margin of difference
between the University's salary level and
those of other Big Ten institutions has
significantly narrowed during the past
10 years. Surveys of graduate education
indicate that the University's position
relative to other schools in this area has
declined since 1957 in 13 departments.
PRESSED BY A PROBABLE federal in-
come tax increase, the people of Mich-
igan may feel they cannot afford to pay
more tax dollars to the state, too. But
if they want their sons and daughters to
be educated in something better than a
mass production knowledge factory, they
cannot afford to pay as little as they are
now.
-JOHN MEREDITH
Associate Managing Editor

Special To The Daily
W ASHINGTON was. busy with
W things about the war this
week. There was a lot of informa-
tion flying around; unfortunately,
none of it seemed to mean much.
Sen. William Fulbright, chair-
man of the Senate Committee on
Foreign Relations, opened his
week of assault on the administra-
tion's Viet Nam policy with George
Kennan and Edwin O. Reischauer,
former ambassador to Japan.
Kennan and Reischauer told the
committee what everyone already
suspected-that China has never
been weaker and that her inter-
nal problems could well render her
less a worry than U.S. policy-mak-
ers seem to think she is.
FULBRIGHT saved his real star
for last. On Thursday morning,
Harrison Salisbury of the New
York Times was called to testify.
1) Though he was not willing
to say "how much" or, "how lit-
tle" influence the Hanoi regime
has on the National Liberation
Front, he testified that the NLF
office in Hanoi is treated "as an
embassy." The NLF representa-
tive in Hanoi is looked upon as a
diplomat from another country.
2) The proportion of Southern-
ers to Northerners on the NLF
executive board is about 50-50.
(The military junta ruling South
Viet Nam consists of nine north-
erners and one southerner.) He
also indicated that the NLF is not
entirely Communist, although the
Communist faction does dominate
narrowly.
3) THE VIETNAMESE dislike
the Chinese as their historic ene-
mies, and are as ready to gloat
over past victories over them as

they are about victories over the
Americans.
4) The physical effects of the
bombing of the North have been
offset by an increase in national
spirit which has considerable mili-
tary value. Thought the bombings
have drained the North of quite
a bit of manpower and increased
the difficulty of transporting sup-
plies southward, they have helped
establish a national spirit where
there was much less before.
Salisbury indicated that popu-
lar sentiment concerning the lead-
ership of Ho Chi Minh was some-
what divided before the bombing,
but that now nationalist senti-
ment is ."remarkably high." Sal-
isbury stressed that the sentiment
and propaganda were "nationalist,
not Communist."
5) THE WEAKENING of China
by internal strife may have very
real effect on Hanoi's willingness
to negotiate. Salisbury said that
the Chinese have been exerting
pressure on Hanoi to keep out of
negotiations, and have threatened
to engineer an ouster of those in
Hanoi who would favor negotia-
tions. He said, however, that with
the weakening of China may come
a weakening of their present poli-
tical influence and, thus, their
accessibility to Hanoi.
6) The North Vietnamese lead-
ers and people do not trust the
Americans. Salisbury said that he
had never in his articles from
North Viet Nam asserted that the
United States intentionally bomb-
ed civilian targets-he only report-
ed that some civilian areas, in
many cases surprisingly few, were
hit.
"But," he said, "the Vietnamese .

people do not know this. All they
see is the bombs coming down.
They really have been given no
reason to trust us."
NOT MUCH of this was new.
Salisbury's statements about the
possible effects of a weakened
China received the big news play,
Many commentators also found it
significant that Salisbury, a top
and generally quite moderate
newsman, would advocate the halt
of the bombing of the North.
And, of course, there was other
action around the center of power.
Some 3000 clergymen gathered
early in the week to protest the
U.S. stand in Viet Nam.
Perhaps the most distinguishing
feature of this protest was the
one very striking sentence in the
clergymen's statement-one which
indicated that people are now be-
ginning to look beyond this war
to examine what might be hap-
pening a few years from now:
"The United States seems to seek
military answers to problems
which are basically political and
social."
THAT WAS BETTER than the
college student body presidents
and editors were able to do. Their
big chance came Tuesday when
they met with Secretary of State
Dean Rusk. Last December, 100
presidents and editors signed a
letter questioning the war and ad-
ministration efforts at negotiation
-it made the New York Times'
front page. Rusk, therefore, re-
plied and offered to meet.
But the group found itself as-
tounded by a very cold and un-
bending secretary and issued a
statement of alarm which was

agreed to unanimously by a bas-
ically moderate group.
Unfortunately, that did not
make the New York Times front
page or very many other papers.
The Fulbright hearings, the cler-
gy, a funeral for the three astro-
nauts and other news demonstrat-
ed the vagaries of finding press
coverage. A new letter will be sent
to the President today - week-
ends generally make slow news
days.
THUS, ALL IN ALL, it was an
exciting week for those with doubts
about the war.
But a few quick quotes of the
week might help to dispel any un-
due hopes of a softening in the
administration stand in Viet Nam.
* Senator Frank Lausche (D-
Ohio) challenged the testimony of
Harrison Salisbury by citing ar-
ticles appearing a few years ago
in The Times, and written by
one Herbert Matthews, then a re-
porter and now an editorial writer.
Matthews' articles, Lausche
charged, had helped to foist Fidel
Castro on the United States. "The
New York Times is a very influ-
ential paper, isn't it, Mr. Salis-
bury," queried the senator. Salis-
bury gladly answered in the af-
firmative.
"Well, then, let me read to you:
'The personality of the man, Cas-
tro, is overpowering here. He is
an educated, dedicated, fanatic
idealist with courage and remark-
able qualities of leadership'." Lau-
sche then quoted another journal's
analysis that the Times had "giv-
en" Castro to the United States.
Salisbury, who apparently did
not have the sense (perhaps he
had too much sense) to ask
Lausche what all that had to do

with anything, reversed his field
and said, "I think you overesti-
mate us."
Lausche finished his time by
opposing a bombing halt: "Decent
Americans will not let our men sit
there like ducks while the enemy
chooses the time and place to
fight us."
* A high administration former
liberal was visited by two student
leaders from Minnesota. The offi-
,ial, observing picketing clergy-
men from his window, commented:
'What the hell do those damn cler-
gy know? I'm just as religous as
they are. Where is their patrio-
tism?"
* A high State Department of-
ficial was asked (in an, off the
record meeting) if we stopped the
bombing and the North Vietna-
mese don't negotiate, then what?
"Somebody's gonna get hurt," he
replied.
BUT EVEN SO, one could have
hope-until Thursday. Thursday
afternoon, the President granted a
press conference. On national tel-
evision he said that, "There have
been, in my judgment, no indica-
tions from the North that a halt
to the bombing would be met by
a suitable show of good faith on
the part of the enemy."
Which means, no go.
One of the Senate's most power-
ful chairmen will continue his
games in the conference room; U
Thant will make some more sug-
gestions; the student leaders' let-
ter may even make the Times.
But Frank Lausche has the
votes, and Lyndon Johnson and
Dean Rusk make the decisions.
Everybody in Washington seems to
know that.

A

Construction omics':

To Build or Not To Build

Fighting Cold.War Reality

TEE OPPOSITION of many conserva-
tives to a proposed consular treaty be-
tween the United States and the Soviet
Union represents the most dangerous sort
of tired and cliched thinking about inter-
national relations.
The campaign of alarm and misinfor-
mation by such right-wing elements as
Liberty Lobby, the John Birch Society
and the American Legion may well scut-
tle the treaty which stands as a symbol
of the increasing normalcy of relations
between the U.S. and Russia.
CONTRARY to general belief, the treaty
would not establish Soviet consulates
in the United States. That can already
be done without resorting to a treaty.
The most important sections of the trea-
ty are those which require that American
citizens arrested in Russia (and Russians
arrested in the United States) have ac-
cess to a consul within three days of their
arrest.
The number of Americans traveling in
the USSR has been increasing rapidly in
recent years to about 18,000 last year.
With the increasing number of tourists,
the need for consulates becomes ,much
more pressing. Several recent incidents in-
volving the arrest of American citizens
have made the need for an agreement on
the right for American officials to get to
citizens in trouble clear.
SEN. KARL D. MUNDT (R-ND) who is
doing his best to kill ratification in the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee, and
Federal Bureau of Investigation chief J.

Edgar Hoover who has been working be-
hind the scene to block Senate consent,
argue that the opening of Soviet con-
sulates in the U.S. represents a threat to
our internal security.
They particularly attack the section of
the treaty which grants diplomatic im-
munity to consul employes (diplomatic
immunity is normally given only to em-
bassy and United Nations legation offi-
cials (. Yet the New Republic magazine
estimates that the number of Russians
who would come to the U.S. under the
treaty would not exceed 15, and if you are
going to have to deal with spies, why not
place them in openly identifiable posi-
tions.
Furthermore, it is far easier to expel
suspicious consulate employes than it is
to prosecute them for espionage. Besides,
Americans spy just as much as Russians,
and any gains the Soviets might make
under the treaty are matched by U.S.
gains in Russia.
THE ARGUMENTS of the treaty oppon-
ents are extremely tenuous and rely
almost exclusively on what Sen. J. Wil-
liam Fulbright (D-Ark) calls a persist-
ing "prejudice against all things Commu-
nist." Fulbright has termed the treaty a
test of American political maturity.
The current ratification hearings are
a test of whether Americans are mature
enough to ignore the specious arguments
of a group of men who are fighting a
rearguard action against the realities of
post-Cold War international relations.
-STEPHEN WILDSTROM

By NEAL BRUSS
"WHAT, HOW, and for whom"
are three problems "any so-
ciety . . . must somehow confront,"
according to Paul Samuelson's
bubbly text in "Economics."
These problems, Samuelson
might admit, apply to the Uni-
versity when it plans for construc-
tion. And, when the University's
construction program is criticized,
there are dissenters with solutions
to the problems which differ from
those formulated by the University.
"CONSTRUCTIONOMICS" In
the University-a process of as-
sessing needs, formulating budgets
and working for grants, appropria-
tions, and gifts--revolves, like eco-
nomics, on the three questions. But
those who ponder the ans'wers -
students, faculty and of course ad-
ministrators-often are diverted
from valid solutions by some mis-
conceptions on the problems them-
selves.
The misconceptions of construc-
tionomics in the University weak-
ens the effectiveness of both the
planning and the criticism. Here
are some examples.
THE PHANTOM, Overcrowding:
That too many students learn in
too little space and that there are
not enough rooms to accommodate
classes has been central to the
student outcry for increased class-
room space and new classroom
buildings.
This is an oversimplification:
much of the problem is that classes
are assigned to rooms with inap-
propriate design. An alleged in-
crease in medium-size sections has
created an excessive demand for

medium-sized rooms. When such
-lasses are assigned seminar rooms,
it looks like overcrowding. (When
such classes are assigned drafty
lecture halls, it looks like poor
planning.)
And if overcrowding is not as
formidable as it seems, archaic fa-
cilities may be an unrecognized
imposition. Poor lighting and Lin-
coln-style benches should be cor-
rected.
A remodeling program - which.
is currently being implemented -
may be as effective as construction
of new classrooms.
THE HUMBLE HURT: Office
and Research Space. While those
who have demanded new class-
rooms have been vocal, surveys
indicate that the greatest aca-
demic space needs are in faculty
office and biological research
space.
Some shuffling when new fa-
cilities in these area are provided
will lead to some new classrooms.
But even if no new classrooms
were provided, new laboratories
and offices would be a significant
gain for academics.
THE ENIGMA of the Student
Station: A survey used to meas-
ure how efficiently existing learn-
ing space is being used has tab-
ulated averages for how well stu-
dent stations are used during a
44-hour academic week. The meas-
uring system does not jive with
reality, and the favorable figures
it offers are specious.
A student station, by the way,
is a table-chair, desk, or bench
in a classroom.

Administrators, much to their
credit, have not done much with
the survey. They are aware to,
some extent that because of the
alleged trend toward medium-siz-
ed classrooms, student stations are
not being distributed efficiently.
However, though the survey is
generally disregarded, it inade-
quately fills the position which
should be occupied by a perceptive
evaluation of classroom usage bas-
ed on an understanding of cur-
rent and projected needs.
This type of evaluation is made
when departments plan requests
for future space when capital out-
lay programming is begun. It
should be unified in a broad pub-
lic survey of needs and realities
in academic teaching space.
THE LASSITUDE of Big Num-
bers: A $55 million fund and a $360
million construction program over-
whelm some who try to look ob-
jectively at capital outlay with the
force of bigger - than - six - place
numbers.
They must remember that the
projects whose costs make up the
overwhelming totals are each very
expensive. And there are not very
many of these projects.
For example, the Residential
College will cost $11.8 million.
Each of the rare book rooms in the
proposed Graduate Library will
cost as much as a very fast Amer-
ican touring car. And if the Uni-
versity's total capital outlay re-
quest from now until 1972 was di-
vided among every student on cam-
pus, you and I and the others
would get over $4200 apiece. The

University will request $149 mil-
lion.
Hundreds of dollars are insig-
nificant in the University's con-
struction program except that
hundreds add up to thousands,
and the thousands to the stagger-
ing millions.
Perhaps those who are dismayedj
by big sums should ignore six fig-
ures on the right of every cost
figure or use some other anxiety
relieving device. Control over huge
sums must be combined with a ra-
tional understanding of the types
of facilities the University needs,
for all of these facilities will be
almost astronomically expensive.
THE CHAIN of Finance, or
"Turn, Turn, Turn": "The Uni-
versity of Michigan has five ma-
lour sources of revenue for its
operations and for its building
programs," Vice - President and
Chief Financial Officer Wilbur K.
Pierpont said two years ago. They
are, "support from the state of
Michigan; support from the fed-
eral government; fees from stu-
dents and parents; operating rev-
enues from those activities for
which charges are made, such as
hospitals and residence halls, and
private giving."
If the University cannot get
funds from a desired source, there
are four other sources which can
be tapped.
That is, if support from the
state of Michigan fails, the Uni-
versity can turn to private giv-
ing, turn to federal support, turn
to fees from students and parents

THE AGNOSTICISM of Prior-
ity Planning: Administrators state
that they do not establish priori-
ties for the projects they plan in
construction. (There is an excep-
tion, and an important one: the
projects slated to be paid for with
$55 Million Fund donations, which
are rated in priority by the Re-
gents.) However, some projects are
given grants, gifts and appropria-
tions before others.
For example, a Graduate Li-
brary would not be financed by the
state because planners feel the
University ihas enough libraries.
(The Graduate Library is top-pri-
ority item on the $55 M campaign,
and thus will be built.) For gen-
eral purposes, the Graduate Li-
brary is a low-priority item on the
capital outlay list.
Priorities then, are established
by those who finance the Uni-
versity's construction, not by those
who request the funds. While de-
nying priorities exist, administra-
tors can use promotional skills to
push individual projects.
THERE IS another, more sim-
plistic priority system. Some build-
ings are built sooner than others.
At times, no buildings are con-
structed. The results from a Leg-
islature's political mood, and even
more basically, from a state pop-
ulation often hesitant to boost
higher education at the Univer-
sity and elsewhere.
For a multiplicity of reasons,
some buildings are built prior to
others. And perhaps this is what
constructionomics in the Universi-
ty is about.

I1

'4

A

Letters: A Physician Comments on Napalm

Trying To Avoid Apartheid

THEY WORDED their refusal in most po-
lite terminology. But, American offi-
cials made it clear that the cancellation
of shore leave for the men of the air-
craft carrier Franklin D. Roosevelt anch-
ored in the harbor of Capetown, South
Africa, was because U.S. servicemen could
not be expected to comply with the strict
segregation imposed by the apartheid
rules.
SOUTH AFRICA'S government had ob-
viously planned a gala reception of
sorts for the visiting sailors. As the ship
entered the harbor, throngs crowded the
beaches to watch. A 21-gun salute was
fired from the ship and answered by the
town's shore batteries.
But, all this was done with the under-.
standing that American sailors would go
their separate ways, according to race,

And, more important, all their prep-
arations were made in direct opposition
to the U.S. announcement that the sail-
ors would not observe the rules of apart-
heid when they did go ashore. A confron-
tation of great unpleasantness for both
countries would have ensued when 4000
men began ignoring South Africa's most
sacred law.
So, rather than challenge apartheid
with 4000 men who were probably more
interested in having a good time than
anything else, a "high level" decision was
made to cancel the whole affair.
IT CAN BE ARGUED that the confron-
tation would not have occurred, that
the prestige of America would have made
the South Africans willing to relax their
strict watch for a few days, but this is
highly doubtful. And, there are many oth-

To the Editor:
AN ARTICLE by Richard E.
Perry, M.D., which appeared
in the January issue of Redbook
should receive wide attention.
Dr. Perry, formerly on the staff
of the Mayo Clinic and now an
orthopedic surgeon in St. Peters-
burg, Florida, devoted almost three
years to volunteer work in Viet-
nam and travelled widely in that
country surveying civilian medical
problems for Project HOPE and
the Agency for International De-
velopment.
In general, he is sympathetic
to American objectives in Viet-
nam.
He estimates that casualties
among Vietnamese civilians are
fifty times higher than those of
the American troops and, more-
over, that the overwhelming ma-
jority of these casualties were in-
flicted by the Americans and our
allies and unlike the American
wounded who have an exceedingly
low mortality rate because of ex-
cellent medical care, the civilian
wounded usually die.
IT WAS THE USE of napalm
that most disturbed Dr. Perry. He
writes, "The Vietcong do not use
napalm; we do. It sticks to what-

because the odor of burned flesh
lingers so long in memory. And
one never forgets the bewildered
eyes of the silent, suffering, na-
palm-burned child."
THESE WORDS have the ring
of truth. I, as a physician have
seen photograps of these burned
men, women and children and I
knowtthat I will never be able to
forget them..
Whatever the right or wrong of
our foreign policy, there can be no
doubt that we have caused and
continue to cause incalculable
suffering to the civilian popula-
tion of Vietnam.
At the very least, instead of
sending cookies to Vietnam, we
can share the kind of responsi-
bility that Dr. Perry undertook and
bring some of these pitfully scarred
and disfigured children to our hos-
pitals and into our communities
for the finiest medical treatment
and rehabilitation.
A nation -"under God" that
tosses napalm from planes cannot
morally afford to keepaits victims
twelve thousand miles away.
-Joel S. Hoffman, M.D.
Teaching Associate,
Medical School

ture will, I am sure, already know
what I am going to talk about.
How often have your artistic and
moral sensibilities been offended
while passing the famed Ypsilanti
Water Tower.
While I realize quite well that
this noble erection most probably
stems from the ancient Attic phal-
lic-fertility rites (Ypsilanti is not
Greek in name only), nevertheless,
must find this ancient ritualistic
symbol quite out of place in our
which has advanced far beyond
m o d e r n American civilization
the socio-cultural stage in which
primitive ritualistic symbols must
be used in order to insure the
fertility of the earth and propa-
gation of the species.
THE YPSILANTI Water Tower
is obscene. Nothing more may be
said, I feel. It corrupts the chil-
dren and adults of Ypsilanti who
don ot have the opportunity to be
corrupted by the films at Cinema
Guild.
And, more importantly, it cor-
rupts the minds of youths and
adults of Ann Arbor who must pass
this noble structure in their at-
tempts to escape the corruption of
Ann Arbor for the edification of
Detroit; it debauches the minds of

Loyalty Oaths
To the Editor:
IN RESPONSE to Jerold Israel's
contention that the purpose of
oaths for state employes is not
"to ferret out potential subver-
sives," I offer the following ex-
cerpt from a Michigan Supreme
Court decision (283 Mich 533)
concerning the teacher's oath
(which is of the same form as the
state employe's oath):
It is clear the intent of the
legislature . . . was to make cer-
tain, and exact guaranty, that
teachers in public schools would
believe in and support govern-
ment and constitutions, and to
prevent inculcation of subver-
sive, disloyal, and unpatriotic
principles in the minds of school
children.
Although the oath is "tradition-
ally described" as of the affirma-
tive variety, its purpose can be
seen to be negative in seeking to
exclude from employment as a
teacher (public employe) anyone
who doesn't believe in the U.S.
Constitution and the constitution
of Michigan. In seeking to do so
the law appears to violate rights
of the freedom of expression and
thought.

tempt to force his views on his
students. Many teachers of the
ultraloyalist variety are at least as
coercive as any "unpatriotic"
teacher could be. If the oath sim-
ply required a teacher to pledge
not to coerce his students, there
would be no objection.
--Edwin Tobes, '67
Wilt Chamberlain
To the Editor:
FOR YOUR information, Wilt
Chamberlain (Sports, Jan. 29),
may have played in the slums
occasionally, but he lived in a de-
cent Negro section of West Phila-
delphia and attended Overbrook
High School-a public school
which at the time was more than
50 per cent white.
A large majority of the students
were from good residential areas
both white and Negro. Two years
ago an Overbrook grad at Haver-
ford College was named a Rhodes
Scholar.
It seems to me that Michigan
would have become a basketball
power years Larlier if they had
given the opportunity to Negro
athletes then which they have
given to them in the last few

I

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan