Eighty-one years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan IIC'CS 111~AX11lAS A billionaire eccentric minus $1 billion by lindsay cha ny 4W 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone:. 764-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Dily express the individual opinions of staff writers ur the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. FRIDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 1972 NIGHT EDITOR: ROBERT SCHREINERI HEW: Prodding on sex bias THE issue of sex discrimination has been the proverbial thorn in the side of many University officials since fall, 1970, when the Department of Health, Education and Welfare (HEW) first charged the University with sex dis- crimination and demanded that it im- plement a program to correct its short- comings. The agency supported its charge with statistical evidence pointing to the, lack, of women in professorial and administra- tive positions and inequities in hiring and promotion practices. Since that time the University has used every possible pretext to stall and delay corrective action in the matter. It took the combined force of the charge itself coupled with HEW's threat of the with- drawal of over $3 million worth of federal contracts to spur the University last March to devise an affirmative action program aimed at eliminating discrimi- nation. The subsequent goals and timetables, which were never officially approved by HEW, included provisions for salary equity, back pay for victims of discrimi- nation, and a vigorous recruitment of women for academic appointments. HOWEVER, it takes very little to make proposals seem adequate on paper. To make them work in practice requires' efforts made in good faith and a willing- ness to go beyond the minimum legal de- mands. Unfortunately, the University has failed on both counts. For example, a Personnel Office em- ploye review last month found 424 wo- men earning 10 per cent or below the median salary in their respective job classifications. But only eleven of these were recommended for salary acijust- ments. The case of Cheryl Clark, the first wo- man to charge a university with sex dis- crimination, was bounced around Uni- versity grievance channels for over a year and is still pending. Clark, a re- search assistant, filed a complaint in January, 1970, demanding salary equity and back pay, charging that she was re- ceiving a salary $3,400 less than a male counterpart. Likewise, after the University discov- ered that HEW may not have the legal ability to enforce the back pay stipula- tion, the University's position on the is- sue reversed and it is no longer a part of the affirmative action program. THE most alarming development is less concrete because it deals with atti- tudes rather than actions. In a recently publicized interview, President Robben Fleming stated, "Some- thing isn't necessarily discrimination if the society accepts those rules." This type of logic is highly question- able. Society is not infallible. The plight of a minority in any society would be hopeless if no initiative were taken to break the status quo. TODAY, officials from the department of Health, Education and Welfare will visit campus to check the progress of the University affirmative action pro- gram. Hopefully, they will recognize the in- adequacies of the present program, and will apply pressure to speed up the Uni- versity's faltering efforts. --MARY KRAMER THE TEMPERATURE was thovering around zero one night last week and the hoarse voice on the other end of the phone was demanding that I meet him on the top deck of the Williams Street park- ing structure. I was about to hang up the receiver when he said, "there's about $700,000 in this for you." I suddenly became interested. "How do I make all this money?" I asked. "Can't talk about it on the phone," the voice rasped. "Meet me on the top of the Williams Street parking structure in ten minutes." "You're got to be kidding," I said. "It's about 30 degrees below freezing." "I'm very eccentric," he explained. Eccentricity struck me as a red herring argument in this case, so I held out until he agreed to meet in the lobby of the of the UGLI. "You can recognize me by 1 the yellow tulip in my hat," he said before hanging up. I HAD NO trouble recognizing the gen- tleman, who was about six feet tall and gaunt with long gray hair. He appeared to be about 60 years old. "Are you a minor writer?" he asked as soon as I walked up. "A miner writer?" I was puzzled and was about to say that I had once done a feature story on gold mining when he clar- ified his previous question. "How many best sellers have you written?" "None, that I know of," I said. "Good," he replied happily. "In that case I can do for you what Howard Hughes did for Clifford Irving." "What exactly did Howard Hughes do for Clifford Irving?" I asked, thinking about grand jury indictments and assorted legal entanglements. "I can make you rich and famous by selling you my autobiography," he said, without quite answering the question. "Who are you?" I asked, hoping I didn't sound too blunt. "Oh," he said, in the manner of an after- dinner speaker who has just discovered he is addressing the wrong dinner. "My name is Roger Hopperfelder, and I am an eccentric." "Then I got divorced." "Then what?" "Then I got married again." "Then what?" "Then I got divorced again." "How many times were you married?" "Seven times in the first five years after the Navy, then I decided that marriage wasn't for me." "I can understand that," I said. "ANYWAY," he continued. "About 21 years ago, I inherited a grocery store in Muncie, Indiana, which I have continued to operate through intermediaries." "You live in seclusion?" I asked. "Yes," he replied. "I have one trusted servant who buys food and conducts my outside affairs." "What do you do in your self-made matchbox?" I asked metaphorically. "Well . ." he paused to think. "I read a lot, I call in bomb threats to schools and libraries I make obscene phone calls. ." "I get the idea," I broke in. "What do you think about writing my autobiography?" he asked, smiling. "I think there is one primary difference between Howard Hughes and you," I said. "What's that?" he asked, the s mil e slowly fading. "Howard Hughes has a billion dollars and you don't." "He has a billion dollars?" "Something like that." "That's a lot ; of money," Hopperfelder said, sounding amazed. "But what does that have to do with my being eccentric?" "It doesn't have anything to do with your being eccentric," I said. "But it has everything to do with people wanting to read about Howard Hughes. You see, in order to have people read about you, you have to have a billion dollars AND be eccentric." "I see," he said somewhat sadly. "YOU'RE ECCENTRIC all right," I said kindly. "Now all you need is a billion dollars." "But where am I going to get a billion dollars?" he mumbled, shuffling. past the guard and out into the night. oF "DOES THAT QUALIFY you to have an an autobiography written about you?" I asked. "Sure. I read the papers about Howard Hughes, and I said 'that's me'," he replied. "I see," I said. "You know how Hughes hasn't been seen in public for about 15 years? Well, I haven't been seen in public for 20 years."; "Isn't this a public place?" I asked. "Oh, you don't think I'd come here looking like me, do you?" he asked, with a slight chuckle. "This is a disguise. No one would recognize the real me." "Is that so?" I said. "What else do you do?" "Let me tell you about my history," he said, warming up to the subject. "I grad- uated from a big-city high school second in a class of 900." "Not bad," I said. "Then I attended a major midwestern university, intending to major in econo- mics." "DOESN'T SOUND terribly eccentric," I commented. "But abruptly in the middle of my juhior year, I switched my major to philosophy," he said, as if answering my previous com- ment. "What did you do then?" "I flunked out of c'ollege the next semes- ter and joined the navy. I was a navy pilot." "Hmm," I said, trying to sound non- committal. "I was in three near-fatal plane crash- es and got a section eight psychological discharge." "Anything else?" "After getting married." "Then what?" out of the military, I got * The Dems: Crowded and pushing Seeking legalized abortion 1VHEN"a popular demand for reform is ignored by the duly-elected legisla- ture, a constitutional alternative exists to rectify the situation. Using the popular initiative process, people of this state can exercise their right to take an issue di- rectly to the voters as a state referen- dum. This grassroots method is being pur- sued now in Michigan to bypass a balky legislature and promote abortion reform. Although bills for abortion reform have appeared in the legislature since 1968, they have been continuously de- feated or buried in committee. Two weeks ago an abortion reform proposal was killed in the House by a 67-29 margin. The only comfort abortion reform advo- cates take from legislative response is that the reform bills have been growing progressivelyy liberal in the past four years and abortion is no longer a word too dirty to mention in the state legisla- ture. Despairing of legislative action and believing that legal abortion is a right too necessary to delay indefinitely, abortion reform proponents have been working for the past seven months on a petition drive which seeks to put the is- sue on the ballot in November. The drive, organized by the Lansing Coordinating Committee for Abortion Re- form, has already netted 65 per cent of the 214,000 required signatures. Nonethe- less, intense efforts are still needed in order to have the petition submitted to the legislature in early spring so that it has a good chance to be eligible for the November ballot when there will be a large voter turn-out. Because every child should be wanted, because when 20 weeks pregnant the mother is more of an individual than the fetus she carries, and because with the threat of overpopulation society has no right to dictate unwanted childbear- ing, abortion qualifies as a right. Al- ready 18 other states as well as other countries have recognized this right. THAT the legislature denies this right is regrettably archaic and subjects women to the unnecessary expense of an out-of-state abortion. Legislative inaction underscores the need to prove that legal abortion is a popular demand. The petition drive de- serves active support. --MARCIA ZOSLAW Second of three parts By TONY SCHWARTZ OF ALL PEOPLE, Ed Muskie owes a debt to Richard Nixon. Nixon's agonizing trial-and-error methods painlessly taught Muskie the credo of the "frontrunner": When you're ahead, let the op- position make the mistakes. When Garry Wills wrote a book last year called Nixon Agonistes, he shot a lot of illusions about the American political system to hell. And Ed Muskie has taken to heart Wills' comments on the na- ture of the two-party system. The parties are built for com- promise. Less romantic political scientists, from all parts of the theoretical spectrum, realize it is the job of the candidate to s a y nothing. The whole [election] pro- cess lays greater stress on con- formity and compromise than on ability and vision." FITTINGLY, MUSKIE'S efforts have been to contrast himself with his competition. In 1968, his dig- nity and flexibility shone o v e r Hubert Humphrey's defense of an obsolete foreign policy and Spiro Agnew's naive blunders. In 1970, his calm election-eve broadcast contrasted perfectly with the Pres- ident's blunt and reactionary ap- peal. The similarity, however, of the Muskie and Nixon strategies is striking. Both have placed them- selves in the ideological center of their respective parties. B o t h have at times avoided speaking out on major issues. Nixon apparently quietly d i f- fuses support for liberal McClos- key and conservative Ashbrook. Muskie, too, holds the centrist role among the Democratic can- didates, seemingly aloof from Mc- Govern, Lindsay and McCarthy; and from Jackson, Yorty and Wal- lace. Only Humphrey is competing for the middle-liberal image. national following. Rather. he -x- plains that he has not alienated voters and that his chance of uni- fying his party and winning the election is the greatest. His is a calculated pragmatism much iki Richard Nixon's. IN GENERAL, the candidate who wins the nomination must succeed on three fronts. He must garner major endorsements. main- tain strong poll standings a..d fir- ish high in a significant number of primaries. From there all fol- lows. On the first two counts Muskie is an astonishing success. He is the only candidate with significant endorsements; from 11 senators, more than a half dozen governors and a host of labor leaders. Many of the endorsements are from pow- erful men in strategic states and have been cleverly timed to build an effective bandlwagon psychol- ogy. As to the polls, Muskie leads on all counts. A recent Gallup survey showed that he has become t h e leading choice of Democrats for the nomination -*outdistancing Ted Kennedy. In a recent Harris test, Muskie rantevenly with Nix- on - and significantly better than any of his opponents. That leaves the primaries. Muskie is the only candidate en- tered in all 23 contests. His real hope is to wrap up the nomination before the mid-July democratic convention by assuring himself a majority of the 3,016 delegates. Although Muskie is considered the frontrunner in almost e v e r y primary state, the depth of his support is, as he himself admits, uncertain. HIS MAJOR problem will almost surely focus on his ability to main- tain interest in his candidacy. To date, he has done admirably, run- Muskie does not claim a massive ning a low-key campaign and cal- culatedly avoiding the media lime- light until recently. A second problem which top Muskie aides fear is that "other candidates will single-shot us." In short, each of Muskie's plentiful rivals would concentrate on - and win - one or two different pri- mary states. The translation: a series of suicidal primary s e t - backs for the frontrunner. For if Muskie should falter, there is a large contingent of Demo- cratic hopefuls panting on the periphery. Notsurprisingly, it is venerable Hubert Humphey who may be Muskie's most formidable opposi- tion. Humphrey's centrist predil- ictions are similar to Muskie's. Moreover, he rings an emotional bell among a significant group which grew up in his New Deal liberal tradition. He commands support among the middle-aged, the less militant blacks and - significantly - among labor. Twenty-five years of political office have given him access to the big money w h i c h many of his opponents lack, And finally, of most tanglible import, he has been running .a strong se- cond to Muskie in the major polls. HUMPHREY'S MAJOR obstacle, excepting Muskie's fleet start, is the acrid memory of 1968. At that time he bumbled and hedged away an election many Democrats felt should have been in the bag. His intractable stand on Vietnam brought about a disastrous spilt with Kennedy and McCarthy liber- als. Even among those party pros Whose affection for the happy war- rior is both unabashed and unabat- ed, there is a gnawing sense that Humphrey's time has passed. Nevertheless, Humphrey's thirst for the presidency is unquenched. He counts on early primary show- ings of consistent second-place strength. Pennsylvania has been designated as pivotal. A decisive victory there, Humphrey forces be- lieve, could turn the tide. N o t surprisingly, Governor M i l t o n Shapp's recent endorsement of Muskie has dealt Humphrey a major and unexpected blow. GEORGE McGOVERN, the can- didate longest on the stump, is a mystery to many. His financing is ample, collected in small amounts through an extremely ef- fective direct-mail solicitation. In addition, he has run his cam- paign at high pitch for a full' year and his organizing group, consist- #i On the campaign trail paign may finally be catching on. He recently received the s o li d support of the liberal New York Democratic Coalition and of a similar group in Massachusetts. Moreover, he finished strongly in two recent delegate strength tests in Arizona and Iowa. If Mc- Govern can pull out the victory in the April 4 Wisconsin primary, which his advisors are counting on, he may generate considerable momentum., He then hopes for major vic- tories in the crucial late primary tests in California and New York which would give him the con- vention momentum necessary for the nomination. JOHN LINDSAY stands in Mc- Govern's path, crowding his base of support. Both candidates seek the' vote of the young, black and generally disaffected. Only o n e such candidate can possibly survive in the long haul and - Wisconsin should be the showdown. Lindsay has already demonstrat- ed surprising support by placing second in the selection of dele- gates in the Arizona precinct vot- ing early this week. His successful media blitz in Arizona hints at the pitch he xx ill employ nationwide. Lindsay is clearly the most packageable can- didate and his media consultant, Dave Garth, stands out in rhe f.e&d. er when his candidacy was mere speculation; recently he was dealt a staggering blow by George Wal- lace's entry into the impcrtarnt Florida primary. Many of Florida's conservative Democrats are now likely to vote for the popular Alabama governor, leaving Jackson with scattered support in a state where he h a d counted on a strong showing. If indeed he finishes poorly, it might well presage his early departure from the race. Two other candidates who ob- servers say have no chance at the nomination are Shirley Chisholm and Vance Hartke. For those with a gambling in- stinct, Jimmy-the-Greek's odds-on nod to Muskie remains a good bet. Muskie has stumbled in recent tests - but only slightly and per- haps insignificantly.. If Muskie is to fall, his advisors have pinpointed the reason. He lacks support with a deep b a s e. Signs that Muskie is faltering - should they come - will be dis- cernible early. A strong Humphrey, Lindsay, or McGovern, showing in Florida may be the first indication. A McGovern or a Lindsay victory in Wisconsin or a Humphrey sweeps in Pennsyl- vania could spell disaster for the man from Maine. A Muskie demise might also mean that no candidate will muster * 1 WE-