aire LfrIgan Daitij
Eighty-one years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

The Daily: Seeking to undermine SGC?

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich.

News Phone: 764-0552

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

SATURDAY, OCTOBER 16, 1971

NIGHT EDITOR: LINDSAY CHANEYI

Congress and the consumer

AFTER MONTHS of consideration, Con-
gress appears to be on the verge of
establishing an independent consumer
protection agency. Consumers, however,
have little reason to rejoice. The new
agency will unfortunately lack important
powers needed to protect the public.
On Thursday the House passed an admin-
istration backed bill to create an agency,
but defeated (218-160) an amendment
supported by consumer advocate Ralph
Nader that would have strengthened the
agency. Under the bill passed Thursday,
the agency will represent consumer in-
terests and have the power to intervene
on behalf of the consumer in formal pro-
ceedings on auto safety, the effectiveness
of food and drug laws and other issues.
NADER AND REP. Benjamin Rosenthal
(D-N.Y.) originally drafted a pro-
posal to create a consumer protection
agency, but when it reached the House
Government Operations Committee, it
was diluted. Key provisions granting the
agency more leverage and scope were
eliminated.
A section giving the agency power to
demand data from industries to check re-
ports that other federal agencies were
failing to fulfill their responsibilities was
stricken. Critics had charged that this
would allow the agency to go on "fishing
expeditions" and make it a "super-
agency" that could run roughshod over
other federal bureaus - which is a clever
way of saying the agency might expose
the impotent and bumbling workings of
Editorial Staff
ROBERT KRAFTOWITZ
Editor
JIM BEATTIE DAVE CHUDWIN
Executive Editor Managing Editor
STEVE KOPPMAN . .. Editorial Page Editor
RICK PERLOFF .. Associate Editorial Page Editor
PAT MAHONEY .. Assistant Editorial Page Editor
LYNN WEINER Associate Managing Editor
LARRY LEMPERT.. Associate Managing Editor
ANITA CRONE . .. ....... Ass.... t.. Arts Editor
JIM IRWIN .................. Associate Art Editors
ROBERT CONROW............. .....Books Editor
JANET FREY..... ... ............ Personnel Director
JIM JUDKI .... .... Photography Editor
NIGHT EDITORS: Rose Sue Berstein. Lindsay
Chaney, Mark Dillen, Sara Fitzgerald, Tammy
Jacobs, Alan Lenhff, Jonathan Miler, Hester
Pulling, Carla Rapoport, Robert Schreiner, W.E.
Schrock, Geri Sprung.
COPY EDITORS: Art Lerner, Debra Thal.
DAY EDITORS: Pat Bauer, Linda Dreeben. Jim
Irwin, Hannah Morrison, Chris Parks, Gene Robin-
son. Zachary Schiller.
ASSISTANT NIGHT EDITORS: Ric Bohy, Kenneth
Conn John Mitchell, Beth Oberfeder. Kristin
Ringstrom, Kenneth Schuze, Tony Schwartz, Jay
Sheyevitz, Gloria Jane Smith. Sue Stark, Ted
Stein, Paul Travis, Marcia Zoslaw.
Sports Staff
MORT NOVECK, Sports Editor
JIM KEVRA, Executive Sports Editor
RICK CORNFELD Associate Sports Editor
TERRI POUCHEY..,,...Contributing Sports Editor
BETSY MAHON ,... Senior Night Editor
SPORTS NIGHT EDITORS: Bill Alterman Bob An-
drews, Sandi Genis, Joel Greer, Elliot Legow
John Papanek, Randy Phillips, Al Shackelford.
Business Staff
JAMES STOREY, Business Manager
RICHARD RADCLIFFE.B......Advertising Manager
SUZANNE BOSCHAN ......... ......Sales Manager
JOHN SOMMERS........... Finance Manager
ANDY GOLDING . Associate Advertising Manager
ASSOCIATE MANAGERS: Alan KleIn, Donna Sills,
Judy Cassel.
ASSISTANT MANAGERS: Paul Wenzloff, Steve Evseef,
Ashish Sarkar, Dave Lawson.
DEPARTMENT MANAGERS: Bill Abbott-Display Adv.;
Rebecca Van Dyke--Classified Adv.; Fran Hymen
-National Adv.; Harry Hirsch-Layout.

the vast network of regulatory agencies
that already exist.
The agency is also barred from present-
ing witnesses and providing evidence at
hearings before federal agencies when the
primary purpose is to levy penalties
against offending firms. In the approved
bill, the agency is prevented from partici-
pating in investigatory or informal pro-
ceedings prior to the initiation of formal
actions.
The Nixon administration originally op-
posed the Rosenthal bill because of the
increase in federal bureaucracy the inde-
pendent agency would require. The ad-
ministration also feared harassment and
over-regulation of business.
HOWEVER, IN September the admin-
istration abandoned its objections
and reversed its earlier stand. President
Nixon came out in support of the pro-
posed agency as described in the rewrit-
ten bill from the committee. Virginia
Knauer, the president's special assistant
for consumer affairs, defended the weak-
er version of the bill as "balanced." She
asserted that some critics contend "it goes
too far" and some critics "charge it
doesn't go far enough." In response, some
observers have noted that President Nix-
on's Vietnam policy is also balanced -
between Rennie Davis and Curtis LeMay.
Nader has attacked the committee's
version of the bill, saying that it wasn't
worth passing. He objected to the re-
strictions on the agency, predicting that
the agency would be kept out of 90 per
cent of the consumer cases before the
government.
Despite the accolades that some pro-
ponents have heaped on the bill, claiming
that it will chase "the fringe operator,
the fly-by-night, and the quick-buck ar-
tist" out of the marketplace, Nader has
remained unimpressed. He pointed out
'hat the Nixon administration's support
was a "reflection of just 'how weak the
bill is.'
THE PRESIDENT'S eager acceptance of
consumer legislation was a result of
political expediency, after a year of at-
tempting to block the drive for an inde-
nendent consumer protection agency. Last
year President Nixon suggested that a
new division within the Justice Depart-
ment, run by Nixon's former law partner
Attorney General John Mitchell, protect
consumer, interests.
However, he withdrew that proposal
last February after criticism and prom-
ised to offer an alternative plan in April.
He never did. By shifting policy in Sep-
tember, the President could approve an
independent consumer agency - b u t
only after its powers had been blunted
Rep. Chet Holifield (D-Calif.), w h o
supervised the weakening of the bill in
committee, said is "ensures that the con-
sumer's voice will be heard." On the con-
trary, by defeating the amendment that
would have given the fledgling agency
more wallop, the House has, at least for
this year, reduced what might have been a
consumer's voice to a consumer's squeak.
-ARTHUR LERNER

EIDITOR'S NOTE: The following are excerpts from tie first ill health and
issue of "Student Action," a new newsletter published by Stu-.
dent Government Council. It was distributed to students on Karen Haas
Thursday. that have ma
MICHIGAN DAILY coverage and editorial statements days.
about the recent resignations from SGC clearly re- Marnie's re
presents a political attack on the principle of independent cal Right res
student self-government in any effective form. Tensions in
Of course the power-structure media, day in and day the term, how
out,' slants its reporting, writing, editing and presenta- tical differen
tion of- stories for specific impact on the people; all an atmospher
under 'the pretense of journalistic "objectivity." And meetings, bai
The Daily exists primarily to train future professionals Rick Higgins
for the system. But in launching its attack on SGC from Within this
somewhere between the Radical Right and the University ity Student
Administration, The Daily has thrown away even the increasingly f
pretense of objectivity. action with w
From its coverage of the four resignations and a theiiown few
lampoon of an SGC meeting Friday (Oct. 8) through a The Daily's
front-page, feature hatchet-job and an editorial, "Alter- wit on SGC
natives to SGC," Saturday (9), The Daily has pursued blue." Again,
one clear line of attack ..Aan
The difference this year is that by entering into an ism is a coma
effective coalition with anti-SGC Right Radicals and which The Da
Administration opponents of any student self-govern- of even forma
ment, The Daily has been in the position to run its edi- slgnations rev
torial attacks on the front page, as news. SATURDAY
on the page u
IF THESE CHARGES seem excessive or "extreme," two-columnsr
consider The Daily's actual operations in terms of the
events and the information available, and what has been
made of them. SGC:
At the end of the SGC meeting last Thursday (7), four
members of SGC resigned: Marnie Heyn, for reasons of Neither pies
stained glaspape r

practical personal problems; Rick Higgins,
and Mary Schnelker, for political reasons
de up most of the Daily coverage in recent
signation had been anticipated. The Radi-
signations were more of a surprise . . .
SGC have been evident since the start of
wever. They arose primarily from real poli-
ces, but were sharpened and magnified in
e frequently characterized by disruption of
ting and naine calling, often initiated by
atmosphere of petty bickering, the minor-
Caucus members were obviously becoming
rustrated, at their inability to either block
which" they disagreed, . or to push through
vinitiatives.
failure to report on this developing situa-
left its eventual report of the resignations
ground, as a sensational "bolt from the
this kind of sensation, "hot-news" journal-
mon practice of the power-structure media,
aily is only imitating. But the complete lack
al "balance" of points of view on the re-
eals The Daily's biased political motivation.
Y, THE Daily enjoyed two editorials, one
usually reserved for opinion, the other run
right under the head that appears below:
FOUR RESIGNATIONS
No power for the students?
ce offered any new informatioon; certainly

not (Daily reporter) Lindsay Chaney's familiar lament.
Both were rich, however, in The Daily's conventional
wisdom about SGC problems, and argumentation for the
demolition of student self-government in any stable,
effective form.
There is nothing new in charges that SGC is unre-
presentative and powerless, whether that is asserted by
Lindsay Chaney, the Radical Right or the Administration.
And there is no positive value in continually turning
the argument over and over: SGC has no power, because
it lacks student support; SGC lacks student support be-
cause the Regents and the Administration keep it power-
less; SGC is unrepresentative, indicated by low voting
levels, when The Daily consistently belittles SGC's prac-
tice and possibilities, whenever it is moved to cover
SGC at all.
Finally, none of this noise, this media crisis of SGC,
provoked by the group resignations of the Radical Right,
promoted by The Daily, and hailed by the Administra-
tion; none of this has anything to do with the long,
difficult job of building effective student self-govern-
ment .
FINALLY, the only people who will give a damn about
SGC's potential and be willing to undertake the work,
and struggle against Radical Right-Daily-Administration
opposition, to make SGC an effective student democracy,
are those candidates who take seriously their respon-
sibility to the people who elected them, and the students
themselves.
Power is inherent in the people,

-1

4

4

j

The anti-student conspiracy: Who's who?

by robert kraftowitz

r

O THOSE WHO have devoted much
time and energy to the quest for a
viable student government at the Univer-
sity, the events of the past week have been
somewhat unsettling.
We awoke last Friday to find that one-
third of Student Government Council had
resigned the night before; their final com-
ments spoke of "frustration" with SGC,
of "powerlessness," and of the inability of
SGC to consistently bring student influence
to bear on University decisions.
Taken by surprise, several of the re-
maining Council members quickly compiled
a report designed to defend SGC against
the charges of the resignees, and to pro-
vide "more accurate" insight into the
sources of Council's problems. But SGC's
conclusions-contained in an offset news-
letter distributed by SGC on Thursday-
proved to be even more unsettling than the
resignations.
THE WRITERS QUICKLY dismissed
the actions and arguments of the resignees
as merely an attack on the concept of
"democratic student government," and as-
sured the reader that Council was quite
capable of carrying out its mission effec-
tively.
But there are obstacles, the writers ad-
mitted. and proceeded to explain that the
chief obstacle standing in the way of SGC
and "student power" is "the Michigan
Daily."
Yes, you read it correctly. The Daily.
Filling two of the newsletter's eight
pages, Council launched a bitter attack on
what it called "the pro-administration
press monopoly," charging The Daily with
conspiring to undermine and oppose "stu-
dent self-government" at the University.
Some samples:
f The Daily is "entering into an effec-
tive coalition with anti-SGC Right Radicals
and Administration opponents of any stu-
dent self-government;"
* "Michigan Daily coverage and edi-
torial statements about the recent resig-
nations from SGC clearly represents a
political attack on the principle of inde-

pendent student self-government in any
effective form."
So, after having been viewed for so long
as the faithful editorial ally of SGC, The
Daily finds itself portrayed by Council as
a veritable "enemy" of student government.
As ludicrous as the whole idea is, it is al-
most tempting to try out the new role-like
changing one's vocation at 40.
BUT THE NOVELTY is beginning to
wear off, along with the humor. For SGC's
charges, absurd though they may be,
reflect the existence of a far more serious
problem than a mere breach between Coun-
cil and The Daily.
In their hostile reaction to valid news
reports on their current problem, and to
well-intended editorial suggestions on ways
to strengthen student government, SGC
shows signs of a chauvinism that has often
afflicted governments at other levels of
society-and prevented needed governmen-
tal reform.
Any tendency for Council to similarly
languish in its own inertia will only com-
pound the difficulties of establishing a
viable and influential student government
at the University. That's what is unsettling
about SGC's attitude toward the resigna-
tions, and its attack on the press.
As a University newspaper, The Daily
has always attempted'to provide full cov-
erage of important events involving cam-
pus student government. In addition, we
have felt it our obligation to periodically
summarize and comment on SGC's ups and
downs as a student government, so that
Council's constitutents remain knowledg-
able about these matters.
Thus, when four of SGC's 12 members
resigned, The Daily sought not only to
report the rather striking event to its
readers, but to also adequately explore the
resignee's claims that Council is not func-
tioning as an effective student government.
FURTHER, in view of the importance
of the issue, it was more than appropriate
to devote an editorial to the subject. Far
from "attacking" the concept of student

government, the editorial merely offered
SGC several suggestions for improving the
structure of student government in order
to increase its effectiveness.
This is not the first time we have seen
fit to offer our considered advice to SGC,
nor will it be the last. But it is disturbing
that Council members should view well-
intentioned ; suggestions with'-such vocal
hostility:
"Every year, around election time, The
Daily sallies forth with editorials against
SGC" is the newsletter's description of the
editorial suggestions The Daily has ex-
pressed. And its description of last week's
editorial? "Rich . . . in The Daily's con-
ventional wisdom about SGC problems, and
argumentation for the demolition of stu-
dent self-government in any stable,. effec-
tivt form," the newsletter reports.
IT SEEMS CLEAR from the newsletter
that SGC members saw the resignees' criti-
cisms of Council as very personal attacks,
and when others, like The Daily, suggested
that SGC might do well to make certain
changes in its structure, they became part
of the "conspiracy."
Thus evolved the rather strange triple
entente, christened by SGC as the "Radi-
cal Right-Daily-Administration" alliance-
that students are/ u r g e d to "struggle
against." ?
The idea is absurd enough to keep The
Daily from feeling very slandered. And I'm
sure our two new "allies" will be able to
weather their brief but no doubt embarras-
sing connection with the student press.
It is far more distressing to view the
statements in terms of what they tell about
the authors. Council members, it would
seem, are acting no differently than do
other government officials in placing first
priority on keeping their public images
unsullied.
Thus, when the media reported an event
that might have the effect of diminishing
the government's stature, the government
reacted by d r a w i n g a rather illogical

link between the press and an unpopular
political element-"the Radical Right."
In this context, our student govern-
ment's statements are sadly reminiscent of
the federal government's attempts to paint
the New York Times red when it published
the Pentagon Papers.
If the tone of SGC's Newsletter is any
indication of its attitude toward strength-
ening student government at the Univer-
sity, there is a very real cause for concern.
More diatribes of the same variety will
only further hamper these efforts, particu-
larly if they are directed at groups which
are clearly committed to the same goals.
It is one thing for SGC to disagree on
how these goals may be achieved; it is
quite another for Council to see a differing
view as an attempt to underiine the goals.
If SGC members disagree with The
Daily's suggestions for improving student
government, as is apparent, it is important
that the differing views be aired. We would
be more than happy to print their views
on this page, as long as they make an
effort to state the arguments well, and
with a reasonable amount of coherence.
But if Council members continue to
portray all opinions that diverge from their
own as attacks on "student power" and
"student self-government," then there are
much better ways to use the space.Child-
ish polemics have no place in The Daily, or,
for that matter, in an "official" newsletter
to which students are being asked to con-
tribute $1.25.
LOOKING TO THE FUTURE, The Daily
will continue to try to provide full coverage
to student government, and explore im-
portant related issues to the best of its
ability.
Editorially, we will continue pressing
for changes in student government and
University government that will substan-
tially heighten student influence in areas
of concern to them.
And hopefully, S t u d e n t Government
Council will be able to transcend its own
entrenchment, and provide some meaning-
ful proposals of its own.

wild strawberries
Point of personal privilege
by alan lenhoflF


f


_'

z

F

Editor's note: Student Govern-
ment Council's new newsletter,
"Student Action," stated this week
that the Daily's "political/editorial
stance regarding SGC can best be
summed up in the informal com-
ment offered by reporter Alan Len-
hoff, warmly seconded by several
staffers standing around at the
time: 'We should appoint a com-
mittee to tell SGC to go fuck it-
self.'"
A S ONE WHOSE personal views
happened to be misrepresented
this week in Student Action, I
feel both obligated to explain my
past comments and offer a more
articulate and updated assessment
of the apparent Daily-SGC feud.
I certainly do not deny that I
made that statement, in fact, I
find it to be a very accurate re-
presentation of the thrust of my
comments. That statement, how-
ever, was my very candid reac-
tion to the repeated unsuccessful
attempts of several SGC members
to manipulate the Daily's local
news coverage.
CONSIDER, FIRST of all, the
recent actions of SGC Executive
Vice President Jerry Rosenblatt.

registration sites." He further
promised that SGC would take on
the responsibility of informing
students in West Quad and Burs-
ley Halls - which are scheduled
for Monday registration programs.
IN EACH INSTANCE, Rosen-
blatt's request was politely ignor-
ed by staff members who felt his
plans were, frankly, manipulative.
A by-product of Rosenblatt's ef-
forts, however, was a growing an-
ger among Daily staffers w h o
strongly felt that SGC should
keep their hands out of the Daily's
day-to-day news operation.
That anger was multiplied last
weekend when SGC president Re-
becca Schenk, Administrative Vice
President Jay Hack and member
Doug Richardson came to T h e
Daily offices to criticize coverage
of the resignations of four SGC
members Thursday night.
Their basic contention was that
they, as representatives of stu-
dent government, could only be
criticized by reactionary forces
who wanted to crush student pow-
er. Indeed, this "sacred cow" phil-
osophy is evident in Student Ac-

news coverage to conform to some
alleged past pattern of SGC-Daily
political partnerships.
In retrospect, one can apprec-
iate the concerns of SGC which
led them to seek out The Daily
as a means to further their organ-
izational goals. SGC typically has
been dependent on The Daily to
present students with a favorable
image of their organization, as The
Daily was the only communication
medium available to them.
The result has been that while
The Daily resented SGC's attempts
to meddle in its news operations,
SGC resented the power the Daily
held over their public image. Stu-
dent Action, therefore, w o u ; d
seem to be a fine solution; al- A
lowing The Daily to maintain its
independence fro mthe student
government while permitting SGC
to effectively communicate with
students.
BUT CERTAINLY the first is-
sue of Student Action has been
less than a huge success. Instead
of describing SGC's new program
and directions, its authors (whom-
ever they might be) chose .o ex-

l


. . __ .. ..___ -____.. __ _. _ J


-J


Ferry Rosenblait
of reporting that, The Daily should
print that those who wished to
become registrars should report
to SGC.
He explained that SGC would

Rebecca Schenk

Daily had split a great political
alliance and had struck a great
blow against student power. He
also suggested that perhaps it
might aid The Daily's relationship
with SC tcn nnsirer assigning a

J m w