Sevety-Tird Yar
EDrrED AND MANAGED BY STUDNS OF THE UNvERsrr OF MiCwmN
UNDER AUTHORiTY OF BOARD IN CONTROL OF STUDENT PUBLICATIONS
'Wbre Opinions Are FreeSTUDENT PUBLICATIONS BLDG., ANN ARBO, MICH., PHONE NO 2-3241
TruthbVWII Prevai"
Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers
or the editors. This must be noted in a reprints.
FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 7, 1964 NIGHT EDITOR: MARILYN KORAL
U' Inspections Impair
Oxford Women's Rights
WHILE CONCEIVED as a forward-look- Following up a series of open houses held
ing innovation in women's housing, at Oxford last November, Assembly Asso-
the University's Oxford apartments have ciation voted to subject Oxford women to
come, like Janus, to face in two direc- still another reception of Ann Arbor and
tions at once. Looking forward, they have out-of-town guests.
abolished sign-out slips and regular house The purpose of these open houses is
meetings. Looking backward, they have clearly to further University administra-
recently begun gestapo-like practices that tion interests-not those of the women
threaten the privacy of women residents. living in the apartments.
Some tempers grew frazzled Monday Last summer when the Oxford Project
night as women in the Oxford apartments was being built, some members of the
learned that University officials had tak- community - particularly those living
en a tour of all the apartments over near the Oxford building site-expressed
Christmas vacation. They unlocked, en- open hostility and resentment to the Uni-
tered and inspected each apartment in versity's extending itself into a zone which
order to determine if any health hazard had previously been almost exclusively
had been created by the occupants' lack residential.
of cleanliness. The differences were ultimately resolv-
,oed, but not to the complete satisfaction
But some of the women at Monday's of all parties. In favor of restoring better
meeting were more concerned about the relations with the community and pro-
dministration's general policy on visi-r
tors entering the apartments. The spe- jecting a favorable image of the project,
cific infringements on rights and the Oxford women endured the series of open
houses last semester. If the November
lack of common courtesy for the students hoseies fpen hosresa olished this
occurred because of an overall policy. seres o open houses accompihdtis
dual purpose, they were sufficient. If they
BEIAUSE OXFORD IS NEW, many Uni- did not, any additionally scheduled open
RE .A.S' house is clearly superfluous.
versity administrators drop In often, ys f
and they expect to be permitted to in-
spect apartments whether or not the oc- THIS SUNDAY'S open house is, in the
cupants want visitors at that particular eyes of many Oxford apartments wom-
time. en, superfluous.
Assembly has stipulated that all apart-
Not only do women have no say about ments will open their doors to visitors
who is to inspect their apartments, butm
also the rudeness of these uninvited visi- from Ann Arbor and Ypsilanti---most of
als terudenesseseappuniin vitForedamvlsiwhom will be total strangers to the Ox-
tors is at times appalling. For example, ford women. Even if residents will not be
the wife of one administrator opened at home, they have been instructed that
drawers and closets in an apartment.a
Then she looked inside the cupboard on they must leave their apartments unlock-
top of a dresser, and told the women it ed for inspection.
toos direeadThis order to expose private property to
the public eye is clearly an imposition and
HOWEVER, there is a way to defend the intrusion on Oxford woen.
right of maintenance men to let them- X
selves in the apartments even if nobody ORD APRTENT womnshold
is hom, t deendUniversity officials' organize to prevent any University of-
is home, to defend Us wersi ents ficials and their guests from letting them-
inspection of apartments when residents sleinotearmnsulssihr
are on vacation, to justify administrators teesinto the apartments unless either
not personally known by residents to drop the residents are at home or have agreed
in any time. to an inspection when thy are not home.
That defense is simply that Oxford Assembly, even as a representative or-
apartments are University property. Thus ganization, has no authority to waive its
the University has a legal right to perpe- constituents' rights to privacy. Oxford
trate almost any intrusion of privacy, al- apartments officers and counselors ought
most any rude or discourteous treatment to be more amenable to suggestions of-
to residents that it chooses. fered by residents of the most experimen-
But one point this defense seems to tal housing unit on campus, which is, after
miss is that women are not just tenants. all, still in its infancy, still able to evolve
They are human beings and deserve as and improve.
much consideration and respect as the Finally, the University ought to con-
sider with more thought how to pre-
University expects its property to get. serve the rights of its students while, at
UT PERHAPS the most blatant In- the same time, it experiments with wom-
fringement upon the privacy of Ox- ens housing' -MARILYN KORAL
ford women is scheduled for this Sunday. -LOUISE LIND
THE LIAISON:
Rusk's Forbidden Fruit
Barbara Lazarus, Personnel Director
APPROPRIATIONS-WHAT BASIS?
Rivalries Mount Between
'U
By H. NEIL BERKSON
MICHIGAN'S two major univer-
sitys are transferring their
rivalries from the athletic to the
academic arena.
The tensions are building be-
tween Michigan State University
and this university, although they
still remain pretty much under the
surface; there have already been
some indications of future con-
flicts.
-Various administrators around
here virtually seethe when the
subject of Merit scholars is
brought up. By enrolling 198 Na-
tional Merit Scholarship winners
last fall, MSU not only replaced
the University as the ranking state
school nationally in this category,
but also it went ahead of any pri-
vate school-Harvard, Yale, and
Princeton included. As a matter of
fact, no other school in the coun-
try even approached 100 Merits.
The gimmick? MSU decided to
hand out its own scholarships
through the Merit program. Stu-
dents who would normally qualify
for the former automatically be-
came Merit winners. Of course,
the University could go shooting
back to the top of the list by dis-
tributing its 500 Regents Scholar-
ships through the Merit Founda-
tion.
--ELSEWHERE, MSU President
John Hannah is highly responsible
for derailing the University's well-
thought out plans to establish a
four-year, degree-granting branch
in the Delta area. Hannah, for
lege Presidents vetoed the Delta
scheme last March.
But while administrators here
don't save their kindest words for
Hannah, they are more concerned
with the effect his overall policies
engineer, for instance, far exceeds
the cost of producing a Ph.D in
English literature.
Thus, while MSU has 2000 more
students, 49 per cent of its total
enrollment is in the least expen-
.. .
.t ': .. . . . ....... . ....:...... .. .
. .......1.:.Y:::.".":. .: n....... "e........ ..."
'r:A
Enrollment
Fall, 1962
State
Appropriation
Cost
State
Appropriation
Cost/Student
Enrollment
Fall, 1962
State
Appropriation
Cost
University
Fr-Soph
Jr-Sr
M.A.
Ph.D.
Grad-Pro
TOTAL
7309
8831
4711
2585
3116
26,552
$ 2,247,663
7,015,434
6,402,553
8,014,329
11,967,182
$35,647,157
5 307.52
794.41
1,359.06
3,100.32
3,840.56
MSU (hypothetical)
13,265 4,079,253
8,937 7,099,642
3,837 5,214,713
1,718 5,326,350
219 841,083
27,916 22,561,041
(actual: $31,170,402)
The figures in column 3, above, derive the total dollars allocated from the state appropriation to
individual students at the various levels of the University. Taking the cost per student and applying
it to MSU's enrollment, produces the number of dollars MSU would need on the University's cost
schedule. MSU would have needed $22.6 million on this basis as opposed to the $31.1 million they
actually received for the fiscal year 1962-63. The analysis is hypothetical and may not take into ac-
count all factors in MSU's budget.
! . {r."'. }:J t :,,Yr ,. ยข}4'"'' :4 "Y .. . . . . . . ..
whatever reason, allied himself
with the irrational community
college lobby against University
President Harlan Hatcher when
the Michigan State Council of Col-
LETTERS TO THE EDITOR:
Reverends Condemn
Swastika Incident
To the Editor:
WE HAVE learned with deep
regret of the latest expression
of anti-semitism which occurred
in our community on Wednesday
night, Feb. 5. That was the paint-
ing of swastikas at the Beth Israel
Center-Hillel Foundation and on
the Diagonal and the Economics
Bldg., and also the spreading of
printed "hate literature" in these
areas. We express to the Jewish
community our deep sense of sor-
row and shame for this incident.
From the literature it appears
that the motivation for this attack
has been the involvement of the
Jewish community in the struggle
for racial justice. Since Christians
are also concerned for racial jus-
tice, and have been working to-
gether with their Jewish brethren
to that end, we feel that we must
bear part of the pain of this in-
cident. We consider this to be an
attack on the Christian commun-
ity, also.
This renewed example of relig-
ious and racial bigotry calls us to
a renewed examination of our own
hearts to see if we are doing every-
thing we can do to eradicate hat-
red from our community. The
swastika is the symbol of the
cruelest period in the history of
mankind and its use today should
shock us all. A community or na-
tion that complacently allows big-
otry and hatred to exist stands
under the judgment of God.
-Rev. Frank Srebernak
For the Catholic Interracial
Council of Ann Arbor
--Rev. Russell M. Fuller
For the Ann Arbor-
Washtenaw Council of
Churches
--Rev. George Laurant
For the Ann Arbor-
Washtenaw Conference
on Religion and Race
Elections .. .
To the Editor:
IF RAYMOND Holton's white-
wash job of the Ann Arbor City
Council had not been so thinly dis-
guised, praise for his efforts would
certainly be in order.
Mr. Holton suggests that Ann
Arbor city voters should approve
the proposal to eliminate spring
elections. He then proceeds to
treat the subject much like an ex-
ercise in political science, using for
support selected quotations from
Councilmen Laird and Bandemer.
The full consequences of this
proposal are disastrous. For many
years, the spring elections, with
their coffee hours and discussion
groups (which Councilman Laird
apparently does not like) have
served to inform the community
about local issues. It is the closest
thing to pure democracy that we
have. Without this responsible ac-
tivity of the political parties, it
would be almost impossible to cast
an intelligent vote.
Discussion leads to thought, and
thought leads to intelligent voting.
One wonders why Councilman
Laird feels this aspect of politics
so ridiculous.
THE EFFECT of this proposal
will be to establish a bedsheet bal-
lot of confusing length and com-
plexity. Councilman Laird dreams
of such a ballot attracting 80-90
per cent of registered voters. When
he wakes up, he may find the
lengthened ballot instead repuls-
ing voters.
Mr. Holton attempts to prove
that a large number of issues
draws more voters to the polls.
subdue, subordinate and sublimin-
ate local issues.
On practical political grounds,
we must disagree with Mr. Holto .
The Ann Arbor City Council hAs
taken a wrong step which could
have ruinous konsequences.
What little political controversy
we now have in Ann Arbor must
not be lost. The Young Democrats
will fight for defeat of this pro-
posal.,
-Young Democrats
Executive Committee:
Michael Grondin, '66
Chairman
Chris Cohen, '64
Marty Baum, '64
Carole Crumley, '66
Alan Jones, '66
Steve Adamini, '65
Debby Gould, '64
James Hanley, '65
Richard Katzman, '67
David Vaughn, '66
Elmer White, '64L
Parking .
To the Editor:
IN HOPE of receiving an answer
from those responsible, we write
this letter. We would like to know
why the Church Street parking
structure is being closed to public
use at night. Until now, this has
served as a convenient parking
place for students with legitimate
business on the campus in the
evenings. Since even the lowest
level is not filled in the evenings,
surely public parking does not in-
convenience holders of staff per-
mits.
We suggest that the driving stu-
dents be considered in this matter
and that the University reconsider
its action.
-Thomas C. English, Grad.
Michael Bass, Grad.
William H. Wing, Grad.
Fraternities . .
To the Editor:
A S TWO recently initiated mem-
bers of the Michigan fraternity
system, we take exception to Lloyd
Graff's editorial, "It Takes a Man
to Quit Fraternity Pledge Follies."
Has Mr. Graff ever heard of the
adage-Don't knock it, 'till you've
tried it? It seems rather ironical
to us that the persons criticizing
the fraternity system are not
members of that system.
-Bruce Anderson, '67
-Bob Thompson, '67
(EDITOR'S NOTE: I was a pledge
during the spring semester last
year.-L.G.)
have on the distribution of the
state higher education appropria-
tion. The University runs a much
more costly program than MSU
but the budgets of the two schools
have been getting closer and
closer.
* * *
FOR THE fiscal year 1964-65
the University requested $9.3 mil-
lion over last year's budget of $38.2
million. MSU requested an $8.3
million increase over its last year's'
budget of $32.6 million. Gov.
George Romney has recommended
to the Legislature that the Univer-
sity receive an added $5.9 million,
or 63 per cent of the requested in-
crease.
He has recommended that State
receive $7.3 million - 85.6 per cent
of its request.
The governor's office has not
said exactly what criteria it used
in determining these recommen-
dations, but there ,is great cause
to believe that the base was en-
rollment.
On the surface it would appear
that MSU, with 29,000 students i as
opposed to the University's 27,000,
needs the extra money. Adminis-
trators from President Hatcher on
down are assuming a missionary
zeal in trying to dispel this myth.
* * *
THE COST of education cannot
be determined on a simple gross
enrollment figure, or "head count."
For every dollar spent to educate
freshmen and sophomores, $3-4 is
spent on juniors and seniors, $5
is spent on an M.A. candidate and
$6 is spent at the graduate-pro-
fessional level.
Even within the categories there
are vast differences. The cost of
producing a doctor or a nuclear
sive, freshman-sophomore cate-
gory. Thirty per cent is in the
junior-senior category. (This fig-
ure is doubly interesting for it in-
dicates the high attrition rate at
MSU. While the school gets an
appropriation based on its fall en-
rollment, a significant part of that
enrollment has departed by the
time the money arrives.) Twenty-
one per cent are graduate stu-
dents.
Thirty per cent of the Univer-
sity's enrollment is freshman-
sophomore, another 30 per cent is
junior-senior and 40 per cent lies
in the graduate category. More-
over, the University runs many
exclusive, highly expensive gradu-
ate programs.
When an educational institution
has to spend $6 at the graduate
level for every dollar at the fresh-
man level, the head count method
of doling out appropriations soon
becomes inadequate.
THE OFFICE of Institutional
Research here has attacked the
problem from another angle.
Through a complicated process, it
can take the University's total ap-
propriation and break it down in
terms of how much is spent at
each class level. Dividing by the
number of students at each level,
the office can derive the cost per
student.
Taking the cost per .student at
the University, and multiplying by
the number of students at MSU,
provides the amounts MSU would
need to run their programs at the
University's costs. The sum of
these amounts shows the budget
MSU would need to run its pro-
gram at our costs.
' MSU
The box (center) shows these
figures for the year 1962-63. MSU
received $31.1 million from the
state for that year-it only need-
ed $22.6 million on the University's
cost basis. Here is a strong indi-
cation that, in terms of the money
available, MSU is receiving far
more than its share.
OF COURSE, there's hardly an
educational institution in the
country that has all the money
it needs. But if the Legislature
would not put funds for higher
education on a competitive basis,
there would be no problem.
As long as they are on this basis,
the legislators and the governor
must be willing to examine care-
fully the needs of each Institution
as a separate entity. Since the
University has a medical school
and MSU does not, the Univer-
sity's costs will tend to be higher.
There are countless other ex-
amples.
ADMINISTRATORS here are
bothered by the fact that the bud-
geting agencies have no standard
method of determining appropria-
tions. There is a feeling that the
University would fare better un-
der an accurate formula than un-
der the current slip-shod methods.
The state of Indiana has such a
formula, one which is attracting
much interest.
The four state-supported schools
in Indiana have a coordinating
council which submits a joint bud-
get recommendation to the legis-
lature. Each school's budget is
worked out according to the' fol-
lowing three guidlines:
-University costs at all levels
of education-freshman through
graduate-are derived and divided
by enrollment at each level.
-Current costs are projected to
the following fiscal year by pro-
jecting anticipated enrollment at
each level.
-Additional amounts are deter-
mined and allocated for such items
as faculty and non-faculty salary
increases, possible price increases
in operating costs and new pro-
grams.
The Indiana formula accounts
for the nuances of individual in-
stitutions and eliminates the bit-
ter competition for funds. Thus,
there is no rivalry between Indi-
ana University and Purdue.
The M i c h i g a n Coordinating
Council for Public Higher Educa-
tion is currently trying to derive
some formula. The University
would like to see the group come
up with an equitable scheme.
Needs here were never greater,
and the University cannot afford,
in coming years, to get embroiled
in bitter budget battles with MSU
where the issues are completely
confused.
SIDELINE ON SGC:
SRC Hits Council Inaction-
By MARY LOU BUTCHER
STUDENT Government Council
threw open its closet door to
members of the University Sen-
ate's Student Relations Committee-
Wednesday night, dragged out its
skeleton-the anemic Council Plan
-and asked the faculty to suggest
some pep-up pills.
' The SRC did more than pre-
scribe drugs; it diagnosed the ail-
ment which SGC itself has so long
failed to recognize-Council inac-
tion, recommended careful treat-
ment-a definite plan and ra-
tionale for student rule-making
authority and, best of all, left the
responsibility for recovery in the
hands of Council members.
SGC HAD invited the SRC to
the meeting to enlist sympathy for
its proposal to transfer the initia-
tive for making all non-academic
student rules and regulations from
the Office of Student Affairs to
Council.
Actually, the SRC members were
more than sympathetic with
Council's philosophy of greater
student responsibility. But they
COLLEGE NEWSPAPER editors are a
rather idealistic lot, and over 400 of
them had their illusions shattered Mon-
day as they ran head on into managed
news at a State Department briefing in
Washington as a part of the Overseas
Press Club conference.,
At this brief Secretary of State Dean
Rusk addressed the group on foreign af-
fairs. After his welcome to the editors, a
large sign went up which said "back-
ground material - not for attribution."
Editors, prepared to glean a news story
from Rusk's words, sat back annoyed and
found that an administrator, whether he
works for a university or the govern-
ment, uses the same modus operandi.
Rusk did not give away any state se-
crets; nor did he say anything that might
shock a rather well-informed group of
editors. Yet his entire speech was for-
bidden fruit-the information was ours,
but it had to be attributed vaguely to "a
high Washington official."
The Washington Post noted that one
distressed editor, not accustomed to "the
art of diplomatic evasion," protested that
"any question asked of a State Depart-
ment official here is answered either
very vaguely or not at all."
But officials merely answered him in a
patient, fatherly and condescending way
Chn itia forthif ur.v
strued or a desire to use the press for
the official's own advantage encourage
them to withhold their names. Each day
numerous Associated Press stories, for ex-
ample, originate from nameless and face-
less issuers of well planned facts.
In some situations this probably is a
valuable technique. If a world hot spot
is having trouble, a high official might be
willing to divulge an opinion or predic-
tion provided that he remains anony-
mous. Even reporters encourage this type
of anonymity in order to get comments.
HOWEVER, it is more likely that this
technique is and has been overused by
government officials who are afraid to
have anything attached to their name
or are just using the press to their own
advantage.Such a system encourages ir-
responsibility; it becomes difficult to af-
fix responsibility for important state.-
ments. The high official is doubly pro-
tected because the Washington press corps
is very willing to protect helpful sources.
. The news function of the government
has the potential and, perhaps already,
the distinction of being the greatest pub-
lic relations firm in the business. Fur-
thermore, it looks as though managed
news has produced news blandness and
a lack of pinpointing the source that
despoils any concept of an honest and
found SGC members lacking in
definite alternatives to existing
rules and unclear about possible
administrative difficulties should
this authority be suddenly en-
dowed upon them.
The SRC also was amazed and
appalled at Council's past reluc-
tance to pass any motion which
seemed likely to incur the veto of
either the vice-president for stu-
dent affairs or the Regents.
THE TWO-HOUR discussion
was probably the best purge SGC
has ever experienced. Council
members found themselves having
to reconcile their record of past
inertia with their present avowed
desire for responsibility. They also
found their motives for desir-
ing this authority under close
scrutiny.
SRC Chairman Prof. Richard
Cutler pointed out that to be ac-
ceptable, Council's proposals must
be given a context or rationale
which denotes the "educational
utility" of the non-academic na-
ture of a student's life.
He also said he was coming to
the conclusion that one reason for
SGC gaining this rule-making
power is that "Council must gain
some authority to salvage itself as
a meaningful body."
* *
AFFIRMING the need for Coun-
cil to move forward, Prof. Marvin
Felheim asserted that students
should be given the responsibility
for rule-making just as they are
given responsibility in the class-
room. He noted however that "I
have seen SGC over and over
again refuse to use the power"
given it.
He further commented that the
basic issue "is not the context
which you present to us, but the
need for agreement as to what
you want and a willingness to
stand up for it."
*~ * *
COUNCIL'S reaction in general
was that it is imperative to gain
the initiative in rule-making:
merely sending recommendations
for rule changes to the OSA has
proven ineffective. Past sugges-
tions for revisions in women's
hours, key permissions and the re-
(Under the proposal Council
members are considering, the vice-
president for student affairs would
still retain his veto with no way
for SGC to override it.)
TREASURER Douglas Brook
also insisted that SGC should have
this authority because "often
when we bring proposals to the
vice-president, there are other
pressures brought to bear on him
which we don't know about-we
don't know what the effect of our
effort is."'
A penetrating look into Council
members' arguments came when
Prof. Patricia Rabinovitz asked
whether Council was asking for
responsibility to make rules "to
get what you want" or because
"you want to assume the respon-
sibility for making these deci-
sions."
International Students Associa-
tion President Isaac Adalemo ex-
pressed the view that SGC has no
continuity because rule-making
decisions go to the OSA. "The only
way in which the problem can be
solved is if the power over student
regulations lies with Council and
not with the administration.
"SGC loses a lot of influence
over students as well as their con-
fidence because they feel they
can't get anything done through
it."
Other Council members argued
that since students must live un-
der the rules, they should be able
to formulate them.
THROUGHOUT the discussion,
SRC members interspersed several
questions which the Council had
obviously not considered previous-
ly. What happens when the ad-
ministration, which must enforce
the rules, wants to make a new
one? Does it come knocking on
SGC's door? What if SGC doesn't
consider the administration's pro-
posal a "good rule"?
SGC wants authority to make
all non-academic rules - what
about whether or not,. students
must live in dormitories? What
about other unforseen contingen-
cies of student rule-making?
Council members' responses
were alternately bright and naive
"Honest--I Think I Can See Daylight"