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

'Jrr."r: itt i . ' :'V ::..4414': 5'.':::::.W:x^: ': '..:::J y .:..,. Y ': :": :.: ,:.., .e ......... .. ............. ... .. ... ...... .. ..... ......... ... .......
ii1.,:8 . ...............:.1 ....... ... ,,,.v, .., ,.,.. ......F.v:.".x"a:":o". 'r, vw'r. r;:.rmJJF. v' " :'. i,. .... ,...4l. ... ,., .... .. .,
r... r..... .. .1....: ..................... }.,. .,. .,......: ... .,........ ..F..... ....,.... v.....Fr ....':.. t...l , .. ... .. , h: +1.. t. l vie . 'S a h ' W
J Y'.rr'r.:.':::.: r.' .,," 't.': M.'r::: r: .1'.h r'.': rr .. ,. "5{'. ".41....1....... r ........... ............ . ......F........ .,F..v . ,. n.N . , .. .. .. .
..Y4....5.7 'r , ,.: v y......,tt.... ..i...t........,...r:::r,". e..:vv':4,14: a : ..: ...... .... ..r Y:. ?..:...11,4 .h.. r:l ...?', hv '1h' :.
.ir..r..........ci'....r ...................4.,.....t 1,.......,. r.,.,..,..,,.,.,F.,....1.,.,......,..................~..u.t r...,...,....4..Y.........,......1:41.............5...,.. .,...,....~. r.<.1... .: :.:':r::.1k v}.;},,.,.}};}t r,. !...1 i,::::.v::,.. ,4,:., .k5Y1t... F'.i .,{,. ai6v.' s 4Y*'1+J:tiv F .1. 'w,.'i s@'}'.1 ,5 1,;.'i 'ii.' i .S rJ ..''k."'tz,. .. ,

POWER
and
POETRY

.. ., . . . ::r ::.::::.::.:.. .w..i".. :::.v.: : :.: : ...... ..:f.1...........f..5..t.f.«........'v: .' ti":titi":i:':':^::^i::"i::::': i:: : :::'.'.:':'::':": Xi'.

:"_i":i:":"xii i": ... + . i r , ;.-. - :.....+ ;,}, ...,, . " ..': .. ': .,: ,"".':. }.: z".tix : ': k, ':"., :". i": '*: :; a...":w: a r: :, ' .:?4 '$, '. .,' J

The Viet Nam War Obscures Other Issues
by MARK R. KILLINGSWORTH

:S: :ti"' ":.441: ."
:ti 1:{ti:

.{' " ' ^ ^^ +. . .,. ^ 1 « .M

ere Opinion Are Free, 420 MAYNARD ST., ANN ARBOR, MICH,
Truth Will Prevail

Nrws PHONE: 764-0552

Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily ex press the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This mus t be noted in all reprints.

)AY, SEPTEMBER 20, 1966

NIGHT EDITOR: ROGER RAPOPORT


Knauss Report
Does Not Go Far Enough

THE KNAUSS REPORT on student par-
ticipation is a step in the right direc-
tion but it does not go far enough.
Despite its positive points, the report
has two basic weaknesses. First there is
a logical contradiction in advocating that
students have the "primary" power in
making rules to govern their behavior
while relegating students to merely an
advisory role in the area of academics.
Second the report falls to present in
many areas concrete steps through Which
the concept of meaningful student par-
ticipation can be implemented.
The Knauss report favors more student
participation but sets up an illogical
dichotomy between the area of student
regulations and academics. The report
states: "In certain areas .. . such as the
making of rules governing student be-
havior, students should engage in the
actual primary or initial decision-mak-
ing rather than play merely an advisory
role."
However, the report also says, regard-
ing areas outside of student rules, "In
many if ,not most matters concerning the
University, the student role in the pri-
mary or initial decision-making can be
only that of advisor or consultant."
THE REPORT goes on to exclude stu-
dents from the major decision-making
units in the field of academics. "We make
no recommendations at this time that
students serve on standing faculty com-
mittees." The only palliative the report
offers to counter this exclusion of the
students from the decision-making proc-
ess is done by stating: "We do recommend
that when appropriate these committee
meetings be public meetings, and that
faculty committees seek student opinion."
The Knauss report went on to stipulate
that student-faculty committees should
be set up generally on an ad hoc basis
except for the cases of boards, such as,
that of Intercollegiate Athletics and Stu-
dent Publications, which have "specific
and continuing needs."
IF STUDENTS should be able to govern
their own affairs in areas which only
apply to them such as parietal hours, it
would only seem logical that students

should have a proportional influence in
determining affairs such as academics in
which their concern is shared by other in-
terest groups. But the Knauss report ex-
cluded meaningful' student involvement
in academics.
The only reason that students "can't"
play an important role in areas such as
curriculum reform is that the faculty
quite naturally wishes to preserve these
areas for itself. There is a natural con-
flict between faculty and students on
subjects such as changing the nature of
upperclass courses so that one would take
four instead of five of them a semester.
The faculty members don't want to re-
write their lectures and the students want
to ease the burden of the trimester sys-
tem.
By excluding students from faculty
academic committees the supremacy of
the faculty viewpoint on such issues is
guaranteed. In fact the student viewpoint
is hardly ever presented and even if it
were the student has no structural power
base from which he can implement his
views. The same goes for student partici-
pation in tenure appointments.
IT IS CLEAR that the area of academics
is one of those areas in which there is
a "specific and continuing need," thus
qualifying under the Knauss reports cri-
teria for standing committees. If stu-
dents are to meaningfully participate,
they must participate in major academic
decisions as well as determining open-
open hours..
It is about time that the University
faculty stopped looking at the student
participation issue hypocritically and
realized that students should have a voice
in determining the nature and quality of
their education.
HONORS AND GRADUATE students at
Yale were granted a voice last year in
tenure decisions. The immediate step
which should be taken is to integrate
students into the faculty academic com-
mittee system and give them a voting
voice.
-BRUCE WASSERSTEIN
Executive Editor

Special To The Daily
WASHINGTON - Despite the
rain (which came down end-
lessly for almost all of last week)
it was good to be back here.
Last summer's political climate-
full of worries about civil rights,
inflation and Viet Nam - has
changed with the weather.
Despite the yeoman efforts of
Michigan's Philip Hart, the civil
rights bill is virtually dead be-.
cause Senator Everett Dirksen is
convinced that it is an idea whose
time has not come.
Inflation may not be dead as
an issue, but the President's pro-
posal for suspension of the in-
vestment tax credit and the ac-
celerated depreciation provisions
has demonstrated that the admin-
istration is finally going to act.
VIET NAM, of course, remains
an issue; the next major peace
proposal may well be a push for
the administration to establish
and publicize a timetable for with-
drawal from Viet Nam.
"There's every reason to believe
that the National Liberation Front
and North Viet Nam have large
groups of functionaries who think
the conflict can be settled peace-
fully," argues one observer. "And
there's no reason why we shouldn't
strengthen their case by pledging
to withdraw in specified stages
once the conflict can be settled
peacefully."
"The I
By DAVID BERSON
dTHE WHITE BACKLASH" is
real enough," wrote a Satur-
day Evening Post writer before the
1964 elections, "but it is like sum-
mer lightning playing fitfully in
the political sky. It may dissi-
pate itself without ever striking
or it may coalesce into a blinding
thunderbolt that will shatter the
electoral landscape."
The white blacklash that lurked
in 1964 appears on its way to ma-
terializing in November elections
of 1966. The two major develop-
ments in civil rights are conven-
ient, potent, and apparently re-
spectable targets for candidates in
this year's elections: the new mil-
itancy of some elements in the Ne-
gro leadership, and the Johnson
administration's civil rights bill,
calling for an end to discrimina-
tion in the sale and rental of hous-
ing.
NO ONE seemed quite sure what
happened to white America's fears
and resentments of Negro ad-
vances when the Democrats scor~-
ed a smashing victory in 1964. The
white backlash was supposed to
be the number one domestic issue
in the election, but when the re-
turns came in, it seemed to have
no effect.
Most analysts atributed the
Johnson-Democratic landslide to a
national rejection of Goldwater
conservatism and/or the Johnson
consensus magic. In a poll con-
ducted by U.S. News & World
Report asking candidates to an-
alyze the results, only a hand-
ful of Southerners even acknowl-
edged the racial variable.
Yet, only a few months before
the election, Gov. George Wal-
lace, the nation's best-known seg-
regationist,, had ventured North

BUT WHILE inflation and civil
rights are dying out as issues, and
Viet Nam "just keeps rollin'
along," there are two other is-
sues which are going to be more
and more important as the year
continues.
The first issue concerns our in-
volvement in Thailand. The issue,
not unlike our involvement there,
is a shady one, clouded by cryp-
tic references to security, secrecy
and strategy.
Most of our involvement in
Thailand, it appears, is closely
related to our military activities
in Viet Nam. But there is con-
siderable concern here that Viet
Nam may be the Trojan Horse
through which our involvement in
Thailand becomes something suf-
ficient unto itself. Why?
DEAN RUSK likes to say that
Southeast Asian countries are en-
couraged by our presence in Viet
Nam: what he does not like to
say is that they are encouraged
because it appears that we will be
willing to help them, too, if they
can't solve their problems them-
selves.
This may be the case in Thai-
land in the near future. In re-
c'nt months, spokesmen for the
present regime of Field Marshal
Thanom Kittikachorn's regime
have wavered between optimistic
claims that everything is "satis-

factory" and gloomy predictions
of a second Viet Nam while dis-
cussing the guerrillas. The pres-
ent government has yet to get
out from under the cloud of sus-
picion which the corruption and
mismanagement of the late Field
Marshal Sarit Thanarat's regime
created.
TIIE CHARGE is increasingly
being made-by Thais as well as
Americans-that the government
has moved too little and too late
against the guerrillas. Yet the
American buildup continues: al-
most $200 million in military con-
struction (most of it for support
in Viet Nam) and $40 million for
civic-action and other non-mili-
tary aid.
And there are signs that our
role there could possibly undergo
a very major expansion. Accord-
ing to highly reliable sources here,
Graham Martin, our ambassador
to Bangkok, has been pleading
for helicopters and supplies for
the Thai army-and for American
pilots and troops to operate them
until the Thais can be trained to
use the equipment themselves.
DEFENSE Secretary McNamara'
according to these informants, is
willing to provide the hardware
but is unequivocally opposed to
sending American pilots and
troops. He is described as "not

only been opposing the idea-he's
stone-walling it. He may have
to manage the war in Viet Nam,
but he'll be damned if he'll start
another one."
But Senator Mike Mansfield's
qualified endorsement Saturday
of the Thailand buildup, and the
general propensity here to ignore
the subtle until it becomes ob-
vious, suggests that the Thailand
issue is going to stay important-
but submerged-for some time to
come.
* * *
Viet Nam and Thailand bring
to mind another issue which will
be prominent soon-reform of the
Selective Service system. After,
somewhat desultory hearings, the
House Armed Services Commit-
tee has adjourned consideration
of reforms of the draft - which
expires at the end of 1967.
But President Johnson's recent-
ly-appointed national commission
on the Selective Service, plus the
draft law's approaching expiration
date of June 30, 1967, give some
hope for reform-and a slight pos-
sobility that a national service al-
ternative to military service can
be worked out.
PRESIDENT JOHNSON has spe-
cifically asked Burke Marshall,
the commission chairman, to con-
sider the recommendations for re-
form of the draft of those most

directly concerned with these
questions: students and younger
citizens.
Hence Marshall and Harris Wof-
ford, an assistant director of the
Peace Corps with a special in-
terest in a national service' alter-
native to the draft .are both eager
to get student opinion-particu-
larly because, at the moment, they
have no idea how students view
the draft or how they think it
should be reformed.
Wofford and Marshall were thus
both pleased and delighted to hear
about Student Government Coun-
cil's November referendum on the
Selective Service, to be held in
conjunction with regular SGC
elections. SGC President Ed Rob,
inson has talked with both men
about the vote, and the University
Activities Center is currently con-
sidering a full-fledged program
to bring proponents of the major
draft reform proposals to the Uni-
versity before the referendum
takes place.
HENCE THE DRAFT issue is
going to get bigger, too. Reform-
ing the Selective Service is going
to be difficult if the conflict, in
Viet Nam-and Thailand - ex-
pands. But the SGC referendum,
and the intense interest Wash-
ington is giving it, means the draft
may be one of the most impor-
tant stories of the coming year.

i

I

white Backlash is Real Enough"

in the presidential primaries and
racked up as much as 42 per cent
of the vote in contests in Wis-
consin, Indiana, and Maryland.
IN JULY OF 1964, pollster Lou
Harris reported that three major
segments of the American public
reacted intensely to the civil rights
movement - white southerners,
suburbanites, and white minority
groups in the North. His investiga-
tion showed that 63 per cent of
members of white minority groups
in the North believed that Ne-
groes wanted to take over white
.jobs. The figure was 56 per cent
among white southerners. In the
Northern minority groups, only 48
npr c-~nt be-lieved it wronpg to rp-
ft5s" +o rent or sell homes to Ne-
vroos.
The . neral faliina among
""hi't5 . Acordino to the nnl, was
fthat *TpnnoC wnreP nt~t.1Pedto thy~nir
+ nela ,h-tt arhak. hut tht
thov w ra cnin too fast anid ask-
; for too mnuh.
i-I't ht ih.^C i'd not want NQuroos
to' rnnv-"" huti cr n-iahhrnhnhoods
("nP n1itiea1 fcn'eater W"'nt !-o
a'1' nay "The rovernino' ax-
innin ;c *1";'tflanelosc'r a neichbor-
hood i sto atual nr imminent rA-
einc1 chnnoe the o'vpater the Gold-
watr vot- " Tn California. votcrs
renopl-d th- state onen housing
law by a two to one maro'in and.
at the same time, defeated Pierre
Salina'r who onnosed repeal. A
housing proposal in Akron, Ohio,
met a similar fate.
AN IMPORTANT ineredient in
white, fear and rejection of the
black power thesis has undoubt-
edly been the coverage it has got-
ten in the press. It has been fre-
quently described as "black su-

premacy," "fanaticism," a n d
"black nationalism. SNCC's Stoke-
ly Carmichael describes it as
"black people having to politically
get together to organize them-
selves so they can speak from a
position of power and strength
rather than a position of weak-
ness. The liberal New Republic
called it "racism in reverse."
When the black power philo-
sernhically emerad from the MerP-
dith March this summer, the
,T.hnson administration was in the
midst of trying to push its 1966
civil rights nroposals through Con-
gr'ess.
'\Then suhn;tfed to the House
by P-csrl-u~t ,J-hnsn on Anril ?,P.
the bill madl it "unlawful to dis-
eriminato ao tainst any person in
the terms. conditions, or oriviles'ps
of sale, rental, or lease of a dwell-
i"cr or in the provision of servic'os
or facilities in connection therp-
with, because of race. color, reli-
gion, or national origin."
WHEN IT PASSED on Auoist
9, it included an amendm-ant by
R'o. Chiarles Mc. Mathias (R-Md)
which exernipted single dwelling
homes and apartment buildin-s
with less than five units. With the
amendment, thevbill covers an es-
timated 23 million living units,
only about 40 per cent of the to-,
tal number in the United States,
and would have exempted 37 mil-
lion units.
In the House 111 congressmen,
who had voted for the 1965 Vot-
ing Rights bill, defected to op-
pose Johnson civil rights propos-
als. They included 62 Northern
Republicans and 28 Northern
Democrats.
Last week, Senate Majority
Leader Mike Mansfield failed to

muster enough votes to cut off a
filibuster and defeat the oppen-
ents of the bill led by Minority
Leader Everett Dirksen. In the
Senate, Ohio Democrat Frank
Lausche joined 12 Republicans
who had voted for the Voting
Rights bill in opposing cloture.
He failed again yesterday, and the
bill is all but dead for this year.
PUBLIC REACTION to open
housing was tested' in an elec-
tion last week in the Democratic
a'ubernatdrial primary in Mary-
land. George Mahoney, whose
campaign slogan was "Your home
is your castle-vote to protect it!"
won a stunning victory. The 65-
year-old paving contractor defeat-
ed Congressman Carlton Stickles,
a young liberal reformer who sup-
ported the 1966 Civil Rights Bill,
and state attorney general Thom-
as Finan, both of whom were
heavily favored to dominate the
balloting.
The housing issue, coupled with
denunciations of the new black
militancy ,is thus a potent poli-
tical force. If exploited by Repub-
licans, it could mean large gains
for the GOP hn the North, and
new headaches for President
Johnson.
Those who oppose the legisla-
tion haven't generally been as-
saulted with the racisms charges
that met those who opposed pre-
vious civil rights bills. They us-
ually argue that the bill is an
encroachment upon constitutional
rights which give each man the
right to sell his own property as
he pleases. The Dirksen forces use
basically the same arguments used
by Southerners, who oppose laws.
forbidding discrimination in pub-
lic accommodations.

THE IRONY of the white back-
lash element, which may material-
ize in November to create new
troubles for President Johnson, is
that the opposition is shooting at
a piece of legislation which is com-
paratively weak in its effect on
discrimination, which isn't going
to become law, and which quite
possibly could have been avoided.
Both Richard Nixon and Stoke-
ly Carmichael, a rather bizarre
political duo, have gone on rec-
ord as opposing the legislation,
They say that a great deal of
discrimination in housing could
be eliminated 'if the President
would simply sign an executive
order making discrimination ille-
gal in housing financed under fed-
eral assistance. Carmichael calls
the bill "a fraud-worse than no
bill,' 'and Nixon said two weeks
ago thatan executive order would
eliminate discrimination in 75 per
cent of the existing housing.
In 1962 President Kennedy sign-
ed an order which declared it un-
lawful "to discriminate against
any person in the terms, condi-
tions, or privileges of sale, rental
or lease of a dwelling or in the
provision of services or facilities
in connection therewith, because
of race, color, religion or national
origin." But the order did not cov-
er existing housing.
THEREFORE, 1966, the year of
black power and the defeat of
fair housing, may also be one of
white backlash, significant gains
for Republicans and a major set-
back for Lyndon Johnson. More
important, it could mean a con-
tinuation of the Negro's captivity
in America's miserable urban
ghettoes.

'4
4

*

Teaching Fellows: One
StepForward, Two Steps Back

FOR A WHILE last spring it seemed that
the University's teaching fellows were
going to have to unionize in order to get
the administration to comealive to their
problems and meet their demands.
For a while last spring, too, it looked
like the haphazardly formed Teaching
Fellows Organization was going to dis-
solve in executive policy controversy -
which actually may have been nothing
more than a personality conflict.
REGARDLESS, however, of the way
things appeared last spring, the Uni-
versity teaching fellows have made some
headway. Suddenly this fall they find
themselves with faculty library priviliges,
a salary increase, eligibility for faculty
Blue Cross and Blue Shield benefits, a
form of stratification, and organization
primarily on a departmental basis.
These blessings dropped very quietly
this summer from administrative heights.
Once again at the University, a little
furor seemingly went a long way-Uni-
versity administrators reacted promptly
to threats of unionization and possible
public protest.
There is still some doubt, however,
that the teaching fellows have truly had
their demands satisfied. It appears that
they merely may have had their demands
compromised in an administrative dis-
ciplinary measure.
THE TEACHING FELLOWS did get the
salary increase they wanted. But
careful inspection of this increase reveals
that it has no future because it is a sim-

lows' so-called progress, it becomes ap-
parent that there are now two levels of
teaching fellows-first year fellows are
first level, most others are second level.
But second level attainment (which in-
volves a salary increase) is" supposed to
be based on superior teaching ability and
initiative, as well on tenure.
While many teaching fellows are only
at the University for a few semesters,
others remain for extended periods. Sec-
ond level attainment, if awarded to all
second year teaching fellows indiscrim-
inately (which seems to be what will hap-
pen), will inspire little initiative and pro-
vide little more reward than a token in-
crease in pay. Unless the distinctions
mean more than this, why bother with
them?
AS FAR AS FACULTY Blue Cross and
Blue Shield benefits are concerned,
teaching fellows may always have had
these privileges-nobody ever bothered to
make it clear before. So what else is new?
Departmental organization to be exact.
The teaching fellows this fall chose to
put their main strength into small teach-
ing fellow organizations within each in-
dividual department. In itself, this is a
wise move. Most of the teaching fellows'
problems are departmental in nature and
can be solved most easily on the depart-
mental level. The history and economics
departments are particularly to be com-
mended on ;their rapid organization and
success at getting complete department
cooperation.
As the individual departments are or-
ganized, they will be invited to formally
join together into a University Teaching
Fellows Organization-a campus. repre-
sentative body which will deal with prob-
lems concerning all teaching fellows.
THE TEACHING FELLOWS have chosen
to keep this University TFO weak, But
a weak campus-wide structure will not

LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:

Criticize Daily IHA Editorial

To the Editor:
DEBBIE REAVEN'S editorial of
September 15 entitled "A Bad
Start for IHA" could better have
been called "A Bad Start for Deb-
bie Reaven." The article is ob-
viously hastily-written, poorly-re-
searched, and overly sensational.
Let us examine some of Miss Rea-
ven's assertions.
HER FIRST criticism was "Pres-
ident Sherry Meyer, '69, called
the meeting for 7:30 p.m. She then
proceeded to announce that she
was due at another meeting -
7:30." Miss Reaven's statement
seems to imply that Miss Meyers
showed lack of organization and
responsibility because she had two
meetings at 7:30. The time for the'
Inter-House Assembly meeting was
set last spring and the other
meeting Miss Meyer mentioned
was a special Student Govern-
ment Council meeting announced
a few days previously. Does this
show lack of organization and re-
sponsibility on Miss Meyer's part
or a hasty criticism on Miss Rea-
ven's part.
Her next criticism: "It is doubt-
ful that any meaningful plans will
come out of an organization that
did not even have an executive
board meeting before the first
meeting of the year." There was
an executive board meeting the
previous Tuesday, September 6.
Enough said.

For several reasons, there were
objections to the motion: (1) the
year's IHA budget had not yet
been approved; (2) the program
is to be held in South Quad en-
tirely; (3) the academic commit-
tee of Inter-House Assembly is
planning a speaker program to in-
corporate speakers already sched-
uled and supplement the existing
programs with additional speak-
ers of highacaliber, rotating the
programs among the dorms.
Again Miss Reaven shot from the
hip-and missed.
The next major criticism made
is that "a valuable source of
strength is being missed" by not
utilizing upperclassmen. The en-
tire President's Council and Ex-
ecutive Council is composed of
sophomores, juniors, and seniors.
Taking into consideration the fact
that few upperclassmen live in the
dorms, this can hardly be called
lack of interest by upperclassmen.
SO MUCH for what the editor-
ial said; let us look at what was
omitted. Miss Reaven asks for spe-
cific accomplishments. Such as
the most successful orientation
program ever conducted by a res-
idence hall organization. Such as
the faculty associate program de-
signed to have faculty associates
working with every house so de-
siring before the end of October?
In an article the day before,
Miss Reaven reported the forma-
tion of a committee to research

casual discussions with two mem-
bers o fthe Executive Board. Per-
haps Miss Reaven could write a
well-researched article on what
the other eight or nine commit-
tees are doing.
-Lewis Chapin, '69
West Quad President
-August Pupedis, Jr.,'68
Williams House President
-Dan MeCreath, '69
Winchell House President
People's Rule
To the Editor:
IN HIS EDITORIAL, "Modern
War: The Territorial Impera-
tive," Michael Dover cites two
reasons why we should stop fight-
ing in Viet Nam: "the war is not
worth the loss of life, and more
importantly, we are not really
wanted in Viet Nam."
Examine the latter reason;
should the people's wishes really
preside over the procurement of
justice? Because the South did
not wish to free the slaves, was
the North wrong to impose its will?
Oh, but of course, this strife
occurred within the confines of a
single nation. Yet I contend that
when a grave injustice exists in a
country which can not cope with
it, the eradication of this injus-
tice should not be restricted by the
people's wishes or by territorial
boundaries.

people. Suppose also that the
Poles, tired of bloodshed and des-
perately craving peace, preferred
their miserable existence to having
foreign countries fight a sanguine
war on their soil. Would not the
United States have the right to
drive the invader from Poland, or
would it be better to acknowledge
the Polish wish and watch the
senseless cruelty with helpless dis-
may?
Now suppose a serious injustice,
had taken place in Viet Nam, but
one which the Vietnamese were
perfectly willing to accept because
of their hatred of war and alien
occupation. Should the wish of the
Vietnamese be allowed to let ram-
pant terrorism spread over S.E.
Asia?
BECAUSE TERRORISM is un-
just, I believe we have a right to
be in Viet Nam-but I do not think
we should be tpere, precisely be-
cause of Mr. Dover's first reason,
the war is not worth it.
It should be obvious that the
war has caused more injustice
than it has alleviated-not just
temporary injustice, but injustice
which has no foreseeable end.
We are paying dearly for our
objectives with poverty and infla-
tion and loss of lives, yet we are
seeing very little justice in return.
A country as mercantile as ours
should be able to see that this
Viet Nam war is a bad business.

tive Council of the University of
Michigan is a student organization
at the University; and

'1

Whereas the ICC submits mem-
bership lists and other material
we consider confidential; and
Whereas the ability of the ICC
to cooperate with the University-
in handling financial matters,
members' personal problems, and
the like, depends in part on our
trust in the confidentiality of such
material;
WE, THE BOARD of Directors
of the ICC, believe that we must
make known our extreme dissatis-
faction with the action of Vice-
Presidents Smith and Cutler, re-
leasing confidential material upon
subpoena (a) without inquiring
into legal means for evading the
subpoena, (b) without utilizing
every legal evasion available, and
(c) without so much as consulting
those affected by the release;
And further, we call upon Vice-
President Smith, Vice-President
Cutler, President Hatcher, and any
others concerned within the Ad-
ministration, (a) to admit the ac-
tion of Vice-Presidents Smith and
Cutler to have been what it was,
a terrible error, (b) to declare the
intention of the University never
to let such an error be made
again, and (c) torjoin with us and
other student organizations in

ple, across-the-board raise.
While the increase may
now, what will happen in
years when the teaching
another raise? Will they
threaten the University's

be sufficient
two or three
fellows need
be forced to
"open-shop"

again, only to receive another flat in-
crease? Why didn't the teaching fellows
L'et an agreement whereby their salaries