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


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.

October 06, 1979 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1979-10-06

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

Pa 4-Saturday, October 6, 1979-The Michigan Doily


frol d
sta 'b
the vi
of A
da er
of pm
do r
go rn
su ss
be for
least o
acted t
that go
ter w
called b
the gov
to tern
for; p
that ha
The s
But. mo
ting to

Ninety Years of E
. LXXXX, No. 27
Edited and managed by stude

ditorial Freedom

Answer Man discsesmalaise'
By Arnold Sawislak

News Phone: 764-0552

ents at the University of Michigan

The U.S. and paraquat:
What a way to protect
SFmarketed in the U.S.
FUNCTION of the federal The state Department didn't make
avernment\ is to protect people its decision to halt funds until officials
fnger. read a recent Department of Health
BI exists to combat crime. The arcn prtetoHalh
I DepatmntiomatmedToe Education, and Welfare report stating
e Department dp mandated to that paraquat causes fibrosis of the
Iy the pub and protect it from lungs. For years, however, it has been
ils of war. And the Department widely acknowledged that the poison
griculture works to keep the can be lethal. The National Institute on
s of drought far from the minds Drug Abuse released a study as early
ters. .. as 1977 which cited the dangers of
gb they have multi-million paraquat.
budgets 'and massive staffs, The insensitivity of the State Depar-
ment "agencies aren't always tment in dealing with the paraquat
sful in their efforts to co what's issue can be traced back to the days
r the people. before the herbicide was even used on
the State Department, for marijuana. When paraquat was
le. It has long pushed to initially being considered for crop
te drug abuse, but there's at destruction, government authorities
ne case in which the agency has didn't adequately discuss the
otally i the wrong to achieve biological effects of smoking the
al. chemical. Officials assumed paraquat
1973, the government has sent wudisatydsrytepat.
iof dollars to aid Mexico in would instantly destroy the plants.
s o dllrs o idMexcoin The overnment also acted
ing its marijuana crops by Te go
unreasonably in dealing with health
them, using American helicop- hazards of paraquat. Aside from
Whichua ti heebid establishing a few token laboratories
paraquat. anotuntil this weekdid to test marijuana for paraquat, the
iinate sending money to Mexico government took little action to protect
araqats prnending moneytdope users from paraquat, or even
araquat spraying, ending warm them about it.
ica's contribution to a practice The State Department was trying
as endangered its citizens for half-heartedly to protect Americans
I years, fo
tate Department's rationale for frmusing a drug that should never
hate Dartmnsat itasforhave been criminalized in the first
dg th fui w.s tha itwasg place. But the ironic result was that
difficulties momntorig drug millions of Americans were needlessly
kngt r Mexican ants, rs.t wa exposed to a poison which is far more
ost Mexican peasants, not wan- dangerous than pot itself.
lose their primary source of in- Government agencies should strive
harvested the crops before the to help the public. That goal, however,
idiled theime lus, paraquat- should be carried out with sensitivity
y arijuaniĀ§been widely and plain common sense.

Washington Answer Man forgot
to get off the Delta Queen at St.
Louis and has just now hitchhiked
back to town from New Orleans.
But he is here today prepared to
give us some insights into one of
the most pressing political
problems of our time.
QUESTION: President Carter
and others have spoken about the
"malaise" affecting the nation.
Just what is our national malaise
and what can we do about it?
ANSWER MAN: Malaise is a
French word for sandwich
spread. In this country, the most-
prevalent type of malaise is
peanut butter, but there is
disagreement as to whether the
smooth or chunky type is the
most pernicious. In any case, the
problem with peanut butter is
that it sticks to the roof of the
mouth. This causes a sense of
discomfort, anxiety and inability
to form vowel sounds in conver-
QUESTION: That is serious.
What can be done about it?
ANSWER MAN: I am sorry to
have to tell you ther is no known
method to remove peanut butter
from the roof of the mouth.
Experts originally recommen-
ded removing it with the
forefinger of the dominant hand.
However, tests conducted under
a three-year, $2.1 million grant at
the National Institutes of Heath
-determined that the only way to
remove peanut butter from the
finger is with the mouth.Then, of
course, the solution has turned
upon itself and recreated the
QUESTION:. Will malaise be
an issue in the 1980 campaign?
ANSWER MAN: No question
about it. Somewhat earlier, it ap-
peared detente would be a major
issue, but interest waned as
hegemony came into the
limelight. There was some talk
that linkage would be a big con-
cern but now that malaise has
achieved recognition as one of the
intractable problems of our
society, it is regarded as a proper
subject for the attention of
presidential candidates.
QUESTION: Well, what are the
candidates proposing to do about
ANSWER MAN: Mr. Carter'a
proposal to deal with malaise is
to say something nice about
peanut butter. Mrs. Carter will
speak on the subject in -Florida





and New Hampshire. Gov. Con-
nally says we should refuse to
buy Japanese shusi or tempura
mix until they accept a fair share
of the American peanut butter
Sen. Kennedy says malaise
would be covered by his health
insurance plan. He says his
family will support any decision
he makes about peanut butter.
Gov. Reagan did a radio broad-
cast extolling peanut butter and
jelly sandwiches and blaming

any problems that might involve
either on big government and
rampant bureaucracy.
Gov. Brown says the central
reality of peanut butter is subject
to the limitations of non-polluting
technology. He recommends
meditationand fact finding trips
to Africa.
Former CIA director Bush says
he knows exactly how to deal with
peanut butter on the roof of his
mouth, but says it would blow tle,
cover of several key agents if he


nade his information public.
Sen. Baker says he will reveal
is anti-malaise program when
he Senate completes the SALT
debate or the turn of the century,
whichever comes first.
Gov. Stassen says he offered a
olution to the problem in his 1948
ampaign and is checking his ar-
hives to find it.
Arnold Sawislak is a
Washington correspondent for
United Press International.

From whence the big 'U'



-A A
Ann A rhor, Michigan
'-rHE UNIVERSITY of Michigan
is. today a collection of univer-
On each of three campuses, within
each of dozens of colleges, in hundreds
of departments, libraries and centers
areR thousands of scholars, scientists,
secretaries and administrators
working in small clusters.
In 1817, it's worth remembering,
Michigan was a university of two.
Keep 1817 in mind; confusion arises
The Catholopistemiad (the Univer-
sity's original name) 162 years ago
consisted solely of John Moneith,
professor of Universal Sciences and
Gabriel Richard, professor of
Mathematics,. Astronomy and Intellec-
tual Sciences.
To run all of today's clusters for a
single year takes more than $500
In 1818, Professor Moneith
doubled as administrator and found
time away from his sciences to



aheadforPanama Canal Zone?

By Jose Katigbak

prepare the first annual report of the
University of Michigania to the gover-
nor and judges of the territory.
Since that time, some have chosen to'
ignore the good work of Professor
Monteith and pegged as birthdates for
the University either 1837 or 1841. The
first because the State of Michigan was
accepted as a part of the Union - and
the University became part of Ann Ar-
bor - in 1837. The second because the
first students - seven in all - arrived
on campus four years later.
The sign out in front of the Graduate
Library says 1837 is the date to keep in
mind. The seal you see all over says
To each his own. But the fact of the
matter is that for about a quarter of a
century the academic traditions of the
day were practiced by a small club of
scholars, before any students showed
Not only physically, but in spirit, it
must have been a university com-
pletely different from the one we know.

PANAMA CITY - The euphoria of victory
is giving way to apprenhension as
Panamanians ponder their future following
the U.S. handover of the Panama Canal
Under new treaties, which took effect on
October 1, the United States surrendered a
five-mile strip on either side of the Panama
Canal and agreed to relinquish the vital
waterway itself by December 31, 1999.
FOR MOST Panamanians it was the
fulfillment of a dream, the culmination of
long years of struggle to dismantle a foreign
enclave that sliced the country in two.
A veteran local journalist not given to sen-
timentality said he cried when he saw the
Panamanian tricolor flag hoisted atop Cerro
Ancon, one of the highest points in the Canal
Zone overlooking the city.
President Aristides Royo called the oc-
casion the "dawn of a new era," marking the
first time since independence 76 years ago
that Panama had assumed sovereignty over
all its territory.
"FROM NOW ON no Panamanian will be
judged by foreign laws in his own country,"
he said. "A state within a state has ceased to
exist. Now the Canal. Zone has been erased
and only remains as a bad memory in the an-
nals of history."
Since 1903 when the U.S. gained control of
the canal and bordering zones "in per-
petuity," it has become a focus of Latin
American resentment against Washington
and for Panama a symbol of unfulfilled
Have the root causes of friction been
"No," is the unequivocal answer
Panamanians give.
THOSE WHO OPPOSE the new treaties
claim they are no better than then1903 accord.
They want the United States to relinquish the
canal immediately.
Those who agree with the government that
*vervthincL nonihl and reasonable has been

people here when he said: "As a Panamanian
I'm of course happy. But I'm also apprenhen-
sive because I don't know what tomorrow will
"BEFORE WE COULD always blame the
Americans if things went wong. Now we can
blame no one but ourselves, especially after
Adding to the uncertainty are a shaky
economy, labor unrest, and demands by the
opposition parties for "more political
freedom and less government repression."
At present, Panama derives 12 per cent of
its gross domestic product and 18 per cent of
its foreign exchange earnings from canal-
related activities. The transfer of the canal
zone any a say in the running of the water-
way, as provided for under the treaties, will
mean higher revenues for the country.
BUT ADDED responsibilities and plans to
develop the zone also mean greater expenses
for Panama, which already has a national
and foreign debt estimated at three million
THE NATIONAL Opposition Front
(FREND),"a coalition of 10 political parties,
claims the extra revenue received by
Panama will be spend mostly in.modernizing
and increasing the size of the 9,000-strong
National Guard, commanded by General
Omar Torrijos, because of their new role in
the joint defense of the canal.
The front's main fear is that "more guards
could mean more repression"
TO SILENCE the opposition, a few days
before the canal treaties took effect, the
government ordered all private radio stations
to hook up with the state network. The local
press is muzzled.
On the economic front, inflation, which is-
under 10 per cent, is threatening to increase
and unemployment is rising. Workers are
demanding more pay and better fringe
benefits, and strikes and walkouts are
becoming common.
But Panama is still one of the more stable

'No one will do for us
what we cannot do for
ourselves.. No one can
take it upon himself to
defend our sovereignty.
No one but ourselves, and
only ourselves.'
-Mexican President
Jose Lopez Portillo
No one can take it upon himself to defend our
sovereignty. No one but ourselves, and only



Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan