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.

May 18, 1968 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1968-05-18

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



Seventy-seven years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students of the University of Michigan
under authority of Board in Control of Student Publications

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

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

SATURDAY, MAY 18, 1968

NIGHT EDITOR: DAVID MANN

, v
ti^4 ;c
:s p
.~Juf i..s

The 'U' takes a trip
to tuition hike land

"IT CAN'T HAPPEN HERE," many Uni-
versity officials said last year when
faced with the possibility of a third tui-
tion hike in four years. But as usual with
optimistic administrative predictions,
there is still cause for alarm.
Reneging on his January statements
and making good his March predictions,
President Fleming announced yesterday
,that tuition will definitely go up in the
fall.
FLEMING'S statement came as some-
what of..a belated bomb. Tuition is
the one dependable source of revenue
that can be turned on or off at will. It
was simply a matter of time before the
University announced it would have to
turn on for the second straight year.
The House's deceptively $2.3 million
chunky addition to the suggested Senate
appropriation of $61.3 million does the
University little good considering it is
still $12.2 million below the University's
request.
When the bill returns to the Senate
Monday, the appropriations picture may
appear bleaker than ever. The Senate,
in March, knocked a gaping $14.5 million
from the University's $75.8 million re-
quest.m
After last year's skimpy state appro-
priation and resultant tuition hike, the
University was considered to be operat-
ing on an emergency basis.
With another bleak legislative year

shaping up, a tuition
sary to satisfy basic
make improvements.

hike will be neces-
needs let alone to

HOWEVER, even with tuition hike in
the carps for a long time, adminis-
trative hesitancy to announce the hike is
understandable considering the ghoulish
affects of a stop-gap tuition hike.
What money the University does re-
ceive above basic expenses has already
been earmarked to upgrade faculty
salaries, this year's priority item. The
library, student services and supporting
staff will be shortchanged this year, just
as professors' salaries came out short in
the past.
The University's policy of recruiting
non "rich, white students," will have to
be curtailed unless larger scholarships
can be provided to cover the tuition hike.
Considering the state's current skimpi-
ness, more scholarships do not appear
forthcoming.
Wherever the tuition hike goes, the
students will suffer=-particularly if leg-
islative harshness drives out-of-state
students to other schools.
BEFORE LEGISLATORS stop congratu-
lating themselves on their "generous"
support of education and before the
Senate starts slashing again, lawmakers
must realize they have not done enough.
-HENRY GRIX

What is the country coming to?

4s +Ati^}::":^ii: friirkFis: ii :: x:h °,t"'eaiY sMS.'vr':"?:+}:::vs v:^j

MURRAY KEMPTON

., irYrii,..........'r$7J}: rii}:"5:45.1 5:v'di.%.% :r.:.....":":ti"::

-JAMES WECHSLER
Dick and Gene:
See Rocky fallX
A MID ALL the political upheavals of 1968, there has been a com-
fortable assumption in many places that Richard Nixon is some-
how doomed to stumble before he achieves the Republican Presidential
nomination or, 'even if he acquires that prize, to fall on his face
before he reaches the White Houe. It is time to suggest that, in this
time of the upset, the man so often labeled a loser must be taken far
more seriously.
Gov. Rockefeller's entry into the GOP contest was belated; it
followed a series of uninspiring broken-field runs in which he seemed
to lose more yardage than he gained. So far there is little sign that
his decision to fight for the nomination has stirred any electric
response.
MEANWHILE Nixon's generally recognized strength among the
Republican machine-men is bolstered by his ability to stay -alive in the
polls. These trial-runs appear increasingly subject to change without
notice, but their impact on the pre-convention proceedings may be
crucial.
Dr. Gallup has just reported, that both Nixon and Rockefeller
could defeat any of the three prospective Democratic nominees, but
there is no significant disparity in the Nixon and Rockefeller margins.
For the moment, at least, the anti-Nixon forces can produce no com-
pelling arithmetic to prove that Rockefeller is indispensible to a GOP
victory, and that Nixon plainly spells party disaster.
APART FROM HIS late start, Rockefeller faces obvious obstacles.
His own position on Vietnam, enunciated after an eternity of reti-
cence, offers no differentiation so sharp and clear-cut that it can
become a rallying-ground. Moreover, the beginning of peace talks
further blurs any dramatic distinctions, and Nixon has characteris-
tically left himself much ground for cynical maneuver depending on
the course of the Paris sessions.
On domestic issues Nixon has proclaimed himself an uncompro-
mising enemy of rape in the streets, a matter on which Rockefeller
can hardly take an adversary position. If he were prepared to present
an audacious challenge, he might properly dispute Nixon's ill-disguised
appeal to backlash sentiment and his palpable exploitation of fears in
a realm where respect for liberty must be sensitively balanced with
cries for law. But no doubt he will be told there is little "mileage"
in such pleas for reason.
PLAINLY THERE ARE real issues dividing the two men, as ex-
hibited in Rockefeller's presentation of programs for the impoverished
and Nixon's warning against "excessive promises," which is a way of
saying that the affluent taxpayer looms largest in his mind. But
there is no assurance that a forthright attack on this front would
bring Rockefeller dividends, especially among delegates who have
invested most of their lives in the economics of Hooverism.
Beset by conflicting counsel and an awareness of the enduring
hostilities of the Republican Right; Rockefeller is unwilling or unable
to assume a spirited posture. When questioned the other day about
the real differences between Nixon and himself, he observed that his
own experience was an "administrator" while Nixon's was that of a
"legislator." It is unlikely that he can incite a great insurgence on
that point.
He seems currently reduced in large measure to reliance on
"charisma," but so far ,the magic is missing; almost certainly John
Lindsay would be achieving better results on 'that-and other-levels
if the Republican liberals and moerates had displayed the fimagina-
tion and boldness to shift to him after Romney's collapse. Only Rocke-
feller, however, could have set the stage for so remarkable a develop-
ment by an act of personal abdication that would have defied most
human equations.
IN THE PAST Rockefeller has shown a real capacity to emerge
from the shadow of defeat; it is too early to say that he has lost his
touch. But it is not too early for Democrats, involved as they are in
their internal problems, to begin thinking in terms of who would be
the most formidable opponent for Nixon.
In such match-ups (according to Dr. Gallup), Robert Kennedy
fares worst; Nixon holds a 42 to 32 advantage, with 15 for Wallace
and 11 undecided. Eugene McCarthy comes out best-39 for Nixon, 37
for McCarthy, 14 for Wallace and 10 undecided; while Hubert Humph-
rey runs only slightly behind McCarthy-the totals are Nixon 39,
Humphrey 36, Wallace 14, undecided 11.
THERE IS NO finality about these figures; they could change sig-
nificantly in the coming weeks. But those who stood with McCarthy
from the beginning-when he was depicted as an "unknown" in many
states-may justly cite them with satisfaction. They fortify an im-
pression that this soft-spoken man, still introducing himself to many
Americans and hampered by limited fiscal resources, possesses a Ste-
vensonian talent fqr raising the level of American politics, cutting across
traditional alignments and most effectively combating the old politics
of Richard Nixon.
(Copyright 1968, New York Post Corporation)

.4

4

Land of

dreams

An attack on the Court

TITLE II of the Omnibus Crime Con-
trol and Safe Streets Act of 1967 now
before the Senate is an ill-considered at-
tack against the Supreme Court of the
United States and its farsighted work in
the past decade and a half in deftise o.'
civil liberties.
The title would reverse recent Supreme
Court decisions guaranteeing the rights
of the accused in criminal cases, includ-
ing the Mallory, Escobedo, Miranda and
Wade precedents. The provision is mo-
tivated by its proponents' desire to "take
the handcuffs (or, in another version,
hamstrings) off the police."
Were the police indeed hamstrung
(handcuffed), the proposed legislation
would still represent a dangerous threat
to civil liberties and an overextension of
Congressional power at the expense of
the Supreme Court. As it is, the claims of
handcuffing and hamstringing constitute
just so much malarkey. To pass the bill
with Title II intact would be to incorpor-
ate a simple-minded and hysterical anal-
ysis of a complex social problem into
national law.
VERY "scare-statistics" on in-
creases in criminal activity advocates
of Title II quote (and no one knows how
accurate they are, since they are usually
presented without specific breakdown)
belie the casual nexus they are trying to
establish. In an address last Wednesday
entitled "Toward Freedom From Fear,"
Republican Presidential candidate Rich-
ard Nixon claimed that in the last seven
years, crime in the United States has
risen by 88 per cent. Only one of eight
muajor crimes, according to Nixon, re-
sulted in arrest, prosecution, conviction
and punishment. And-the final fillip-
"Among the contributing factors to the
small figure are the decisions of a ma-
jority of one of the United'States Su-
preme Court."
With such scanty analysis as this, it
would be tempting to dismiss the claim
out of hand as-a flagrant example of
post hoc ergo propter hoc. Unfortunately,
the Nixon analysis (which, in fairness, is
far more sophisticated than the justifi-
cation of Title II's Senate sponsors)
barely meets the "post" part of the fal-
lacy. The increase in crime, according to
Nixon, has transpired over the last seven
Second class postage paid at Ann Arbor, Michigan,
420 Maynard St.. Ann Arbor, Michigan, 48104.
Daily except Sunday and Monday during regular
summer session.
Daily except Monday during regular academic
school year.
The Daily Is a member of the Associated Press, the
College Press Service, and Liberation News Service.
Summer subscription rate: $2.50 per term by car-

years. The earliest of the court decisions
to be overturned was in 1959, but it ap-
plied only to Federal courts-where few
cases get. The rest of the decisions were
all after 1964-four years ago; what,
then, caused the increase between 1961
and 1964?
NIXON furthermore neglected to men-
tion that of the only one in eight
cases which sees arrest, prosecution, con-
viction and punishment, only one in four
in the first place ever results in arrest.
Of the remaining four, at least part
must be chalked up to punishment -
which again has nothing to do with
procedural rules of evidence.
Finally, Nixon ignored the studies
which have been made of the actual
effects of SupremeCourt rules for con-
fessions on the work of police and crimi-
nal prosecutors. These have found, for
the most part, that either the rules have
been largely ignored, or, where they have
been followed, have had little effect.
The superficiality of Nixon's relatively
"informed" support for Title II is high-
lighted by his argument in behalf of
Title III-the section of the bill legal-
izing wiretapping. Arguing that Title III
"conforms meticulously" to Supreme
Court rules, Nixon argued "Any extra-
neous evidence gathered by the eaves-
drop evidence would be inadmissable in
court." A protection which in reality is
no protection at all, since once the extra-
neous information is known other ways
can be found to confirm it to the satis-
faction of a court.
Despite all this, many Senators who
have even less in the way of logic or
evidence than Nixon-are pushing Title
II as a panacea to wipe crime off the face
of the map. Senator Sam Ervin of North
Carolina, an advocate of the measure
who is also chairman of the Subcommit-
tee on Separation of Powers, is going to
hold an inquiry beginning June 11 to de-
termine whether "the Supreme Court is
exceeding its powers." In a Senate speech,
Ervin said the Court "faced . . . a crisis
of confidence of a magnitude rarely
equaled in its history."
Indeed, it does, and the reason is the
perpetrations of misinformation by offi-
cials who should know better, men who
would make the Supreme Court a whip-
ping boy for the upsurge of social forces
they do not understand and choose not
to study. The Supreme Court is well with-
in the boundaries of its powers in inter-
preting the Constitution to protect the
rights of Americans.
The question is, is Congress within its
rights? The Senate would do well to heed
carefully the advice of Senator Stephen
Young of Ohio in a speech quoted yes-

Near (Philadelphia) is a most
splended unfinished marble
structure for the Girard College,
founded by a deceased gentle-
man of-that name and of enor-
mous wealth, which, if com-
pleted according to the original
design, will be perhaps the rich-
est edifice of modern times. But
the bequest is involved in legal
disputes and pending them the
work has stopped; so that, like
so many other great under-
takings in America, even this is
rather going to be done of these
days than doing now.
-Charles Dickens,
"American Notes"
E SALVATION of Oakland,
like so many great under-
takings in America, is rather
going to be done.
Its disaster is the one common
to cities: In the last 10 years its
overall population has declined 5
per cent, and its Negro population
has increased 73 per cent. It is
a city of considerable amenity.
Only 15 per cent of its housing
units are substandard.
Oakland is also a tight union
town, and the Labor Dept esti-
mates that one-third of its labor
force is unable to earn a decent
living.
IT IS RIDICULOUS to quarrel
over whose fault this is, although
the city and the special federal
team which has been sent in to
repair the damage seem to have
spent a good deal of time quarel-
ing about almost nothing else.
Oakland, being next to the Uni-
versity of California, has been stu-
died more than any city in Amer-

ica, starting with a $2,000,000
Ford Foundation grant six years
ago. There are 125 different fed-
eral aid programs in Oakland;
this is a town whose highest craft
is the composition of applications
for federal aid. It is impossible to
get through a conversation with a
citizen, be he ever so humble,
without the expression "matching
grant" creeping into the conver-
sation.
OAKLAND strives for its recla-
mation pretty much as Americans
(or Russians or Chinese for that
matter) always do-by building
edifices for the wonderment of
non-residents. Its port commission
has a higher budget than the en-
tire city government. The 30 per
cent of the white population
which has moved out in the last
10 years kept its construction
union cards in Oakland, of course;
the federal government has a rule
of thumb that 58 per cent of the
wages paid on its Oakland con-
struction projects go to people who
live outside of Oakland.
The city is, of course, concerned
about its poor and not just be-
cause nowadays it isn't easy to get
federal money without attaching
a rider certifying that somewhere
in the plans there's a little grease
for the hard core.
The government will shortly
grant 13,000,000 to World Air-
ways to expand the local airport.
The president of World Airways
was listed recently as in the $100,
000,000 class, which would suggest
that he might be able to find
$13,000,000 around the money
market somewhere; but the gov-

ernment came rushing to his re-
lief because he promised that his r
new facility would train and hire
Oakland Negroes.
TO HIM WHO hath it shall be
given. It is hard to blame the gov-
ernment, of course, its own train-
ing program for the unemployed
having been severely limited by
the customs of the community.
The most impressive effort was a
course in fry-cooking at the skill
training center; the basic restau-
rant shortage in the East Bay is
for chefs; but the restaurant
union has closed its books, so fry-
cook and pantrymen it had to be.
The skill training center grad-
uated 47cooks, of whom 36 found
jobs. The center cost $11,493 per
student per class, 15 per cent of
that for training allowances and
all the rest for administration.
The city spends about $5,000,000
a year for the poor. An incal-
culable amount of it goes for stu-
dies, which have a very high labor
rate. The University of California
got $25,000 to study a dilapidated,1
school district. It, came up with
very pretty drawings for an edu-
cation park. The Board of Educa-
tion, of course, just announced
that its budget can barely cover
routine repairs. This did not keep
the university for discussing at
length the standards and problems
of educational parks, although it
gave no evidence that one exists
anywhere in America. We haven't
just dreamed of Utopia in this
country; our social sciences have
maps, and experience charts for
things that are absolutely myth-
ical.
(Copyright 1968-New York Post Corp.)

4

N
4

American electoral politics: For whom the bell tolls

By HARVEY WASSERMAN
CHICAGO (CPS) - "Can Amer-
ica Be Salvaged," or, as most
preferred to call it, "The LBJ Me-
morial Teach-in on Electoral Poli-
tics," was the first major univer-
sity teach-in to deal solely with
the role of elections in America.
Running through mid-afternoon
late into the night at the Univer-
sity of Chicago's Rockefeller Cha-
pel, the conference, sponsored by
Students for a Democratic So-
ciety, drew crowds of from 2-700
listeners whose politics ranged
from conservative Republican to
McCarthy Democrat to Marxist
radical.
Arthur Waskow of the Institute
for Policy Studies, author of From
Race Riot to Sit-in, opened the
conference by explaining his role
as a Kennedy-pledged delegate
from Washington, D.C. to this
summer's.Democratic National
Convention.
"THE TWO simultaneous cam-
paigns (of Kennedy and McCar-
thy) have illustrated major short-
comings in each candidate. Al-
though both candidates are defi-
cient overall, people are at least
able to see very clearly that RFK
does't represent the end of the
empire; and that McCarthy
doesn't represent the end to ra-
cism.
"From Washington, D.C., there
will be six or seven delegates (of
44) pledged to making radical de-
mands on the party, demands it
cannot meet-the seating of the
black Missippi Freedom Demo-
cratic Delegation, that Mayor

not fit to choose a President (this
remark drew heavy applause),
that the party limit itself to a
$100 maximum on individual con-
tributions, and free itself from
corporate control, and that all
delegates to future conventions be
named in neighborhood conven-
tions. We will demonstrate to the
party that there are millions
ready to organize independent of
them. The party will become dem-
ocratic or will be broken."
Waskow was followed by a rep-
resentative of the California Peace
and Freedom Party, who outlined
the success of an independent
radical party in getting on the
ballot in a large state. "We have
been free to outline our own plat-
form-immediate withdrawal from
Vietnam, self-determination for
the ghettoes, all the way down the
line. In Los Angeles we have a
mcandidate running for District
Attorneyhwho is pledged not to
enforce the marijuana laws."
The CPFP has not yet nom-
inated its Presidential candidate,
but is offering candidates in a
number of Congressional races,
one of them Mario Savio of the
Berkeley Free SpeechaMovement.
GUS SAVAGE, a black' candi-
date for Congress in a racially
hostile, divided district of Chi-
cago, asked the audience, "Can
you imagine the education it will
be for those people in my district
who have been out fighting busing
to wake up one morning and find
they have a black Congressman?
I've been telling my young black
friends, 'when its daylight out and
you can't throw any molotov cock-

man spoke of the Columbia oc-
cupation: "I was in the math
building with all theideologists.
We had meeting after meeting and
we set up a lousy government.
Across the way the architects were
in Avery Hall. They spent a lot
of their time designing a barri-
cade, and finally got one with neat
symmetrical enforcements. As it
turned out, the cops walked right
into Avery Hall and spent hours
breaking through our barricade;
but the architects had a much
better system of governing them-
selves then we did.
"That's where it's at-the revo-
lution is taking care of the ques-
tions that directly concern you.
It's obvious that land is the real
important thing-that's a reason
we took Columbia, we wanted the
land, it was our home."
Hoffman outlined a "politics of
ecstasy" in which men find them-
selves and satisfy their needs.
"People are using land in Ari-
zona and New Mexico, in Canada
and the Lower East Side. The cops
come-they will always come-
but we have found our thing."
HOFFMAN was followed by a
debate between Clark Kissinger, a
Chicago organizer, and Steve Cohn,
press aide to Senator Eugene Mc-
Carthy. Kissinger said he was "ap-
palled by the number of McCarthy
buttons on jackets which also car-
ry omega (resist) buttons. Some-
how you people are still under the
illusion that a good man can
'sneak in' and right the wrongs
or the society. If McCarthy were
for resistance, where was he when
Spock and Coffin were indicted?

wants tactical retreat at home and
abroad. All of you agree no basic
change can come about until the
constituency is ready for it, yet
you continue to work for a man at
the top whose position you know is
basically an extremely conserva-
tive one."
Cohn countered by noting Mc-
Carthy was the only candidate to
publically endorse the Kerner com-
mission report, and that he has
said the war is morally indefen-
sible. He said "it ,can be estab-
lished that calling for immediate
withdrawal has negative conno-
tations to people. McCarthy will
not change the quality of Amer-
ican life (this remark drew wide
applause) but he is not a tradi-
tional liberal or traditional po-
litician. He hasc integrity, and his
low-key conception of the Presi-
dency would help community or-
ganizing."
Kissinger responded by saying
he, too, hoped McCarthy would
win so that "people will be re-
minded, just as all those who fol-
lowed Adlai Stevenson through
to the UN when he began lying to
defend the Vietnam policy, that
liberalism is dead, and that men
cannot change things from the
top."
IN THE question-and-answer
period one McCarthy supporter
expressed the feelink 'that "those
of us who supported Johnson in
1964 were duped, but with Gold-
water what would have happened?
Nuclear war and complete control
of the war by the military. Now,
again, we are faced with a situ-
ation'where we must support the

"That is our right, she said, to
spend as much as we want. It is
a free country. The Rockefellers
are free to do it too.
"Thus," said Draper, "a sys-
tem based on the concentration
of wealth makes people free to buy
things, cars, houses, elections,
other people, as long as they have
the money. If capitalists treat
their owncountry as badly as they
do for profit, can you, imagine
what they are willing to do to
someone else's, like Vietnam?"
DRAPER SAID "if you want to
have a change in the quality of
life, you must first have a system
where men have the means to
maintain their shunman dignity
with decent food, shelter and po-
litical control. This means a sys-
tem which does not depend on
man's worst acquisitive facets but
one basedon humanist assump-
tions. A root change can come
about only if total control passes
from the wealthy oligarchy to
democratic control from the bot-
tom."
Paul Booth, a Chicago organizer,
debated University of Chicago So-
ciologist Jerome Schonik on liber-
al vs. radical tactics. Booth crit-
icized the McCarthy candidacy for
its essential belief in the legiti-
macy of the U.S. presence in Viet-
nam.
At about 10 p.m. the lights in
the chapel were turned out, but
some 200 participants stayed on
through the evening to.. debate by
candlelight.t the proposition of
saving America within and with-
out the mechanism of electing a
President.

.4'
A

Back to Top

© 2017 Regents of the University of Michigan