14e 3fiien Daitj Eighty years of editorial freedom Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Elec tion Milliken vs. L 420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mich. News Phone: 764-0552 Editorials printed in The Michigan Daily express the individual opinions of staff writers or the editors. This must be noted in all reprints. SUNDAY, NOVEMBER 1, 1970 NIGHT EDITOR: STEVE KOPPMAN Overcoming disillusionment AS THIS YEAR'S elections approach, students find themselves once more questioning the value of participating in politics. Nagging doubts concern- ing the validity of working through the system, the opportunities for political alternatives and the possibilities for achieving social change are aroused once again. The basis of these doubts extends to the beginning of the last decade and the election of John Kennedy. Most of us were children when Kennedy was elected President. We grew up thinking that'had he lived; America would have been in less of a mess. However, today the myths of the Kennedy presidency strike increasingly hollow chords in our conscience. The realities of h i s policies in Vietnam, his harrangs about "missile gaps" and his role in the Bay of Pigs invasion make us doubt that Kennedy was really different. In re- trospect, he was just another cold-war- rior, out to fight the illusions of a dea- mon at the expense of the real prob- lems of society. And then there was Johnson. We hated Johnson. And we knew we were right. So we marched against the war, we went to the ,Pentagon, we signed petitions, and nothing happened. When McCarthy came along we supported and worked for him - not because we thought he would win so much as we had to do something. But the incredible happened. On March 31, 1968 LBJ astounded us. It seemed we really could change things. For one glorious spring we plunged in- to electoral politics, warning ourselves that we were giving "the system" one last chance. With Bobby Kennedy in the race, who could tell what was pos- sible? It was a captivating dream, and it was shattered only as dreams can shatter - on the streets of Chicago during a few hot August days. All our energy, all our efforts, all our hopes: only to wind up with the non- choice' of Humphrey or Nixon. The taste in our mouths was bitter. SOMEHOW Chicago changed us. Few hung on to their dreams after- wards. Some were radicalized and most of us were disillusioned. We had to question the nature of a political sys- tem which turned our best intentions into the most grotesque nightmares. However, many of us could only ques- tion American politics within a very limited scope. From the time we took social studies in elementary school, we were told of the value of America's two-arty sys- tem. This, the teachers said, was the stability of our political democracy. What we were never taught - but only learned through experience - w a s the inherent conservatism of the two- party system. In order to achieve change it is ne- cessary to follow a program. B u t these parties - because of their size and stability - have no such pro- grams. They want to win elections for the sake of winning them and t h e y place a higher priority on a candi- date's charisma than on his ideology. We had to learn that what we saw before us were two conglomerates of politicians, each toying with the pub- lic's emotions, -appealing to its fears and resting its hopes on symbols, rit- uals and personalities rather than dealing with problems, pursuing a pro- gram or even espousing a philosophy. What kind of choice can the system offer if you realize political participa- tion is possible only to the extent that you are willing to play the politicians' games, sell yourself on a television set and compromise your ideals? NO, WE CAN not endorse the two- party system as it exists now At best we can support and vote for in- dividual candidates who represent liberal alternatives to those who would increase our alienation. Certainly, this is not the time to stop voting because positive change seems remote. There is a difference between having Phillip Hart or Lenore Romney as senator. However, we should never limit our- selves to simply preventing society from taking a step backwards. Social change remains our ultimate and most important, goal. Moreover, we cannot shrug aside the concept of electoral politics as meaningless activity. At the very least, the failures of 1968 pro- vided many small victories in terms of expanding our own consciousness of the need for change. The fact that the two-party system is morally corrupt and tectically un- viable for the purposes of social change does not justify ignoring opportuni- ties presented by working through elec- toral politics. Most importantly, we must realize that there are creative alternatives to the two-party system within the scope of electoral politics. Ideally a political party should be an organization dedicated to the pop- ularization and achievement of specific programs consistent with its philoso- phical goals. If a party becomes con- cerned with simply increasing its num- bers (having such a vague ideological foundation that it can no longer ex- clude anyone) then it will no longer be a worthwhile social force. Any party, even those remaining in minority positions, must not com- promise its programs to accommodate itself to p r ev ailin g attitudes., Rather than remaining m-inority cau- cuses within unmanageable coalitions - which characterize the Democratic and Republican parties - parties must be free to pursue independent courses, following their own best interests and directly appealing to voters-at-large, hoping to.convince or at least educate them to a different point of view. Parties which act in this manner are not foreign to political democracies. In fact, the United States is probably the exception to most governments in that a healthy third party does not exist here. In many countries, parties which only garner a small minority of seats often emerge as the determining influence in the pomposition and ac- tions of the government in power. The new government in Chile is only the most recent example of this occurrence. THE VALUE in establishing ' s u c h alternative parties in the United States is clear. For too long, student, labor and minority groups have com- promised their interests by supnorting either the Democratic or Republican party - for lack of an alternative. It is time we started advocating our own interests, independent of and un- compromised by either of the two exist- ing parties. Thus, while stating our support for certain candidates in this election, we propose the creation of a progressive party, seeking positive social change and using electoral politics as a tool for educating people to the needs of society, as a major meaningful direc- tion for political action in this coun- try. -STUART GANNES Editorial Director -JIM BEATTIE (Editor's note: The following recommendations w e r e re- searched and written by Mark Dillen, Steve Koppman, Jim Neubacher and Rick Perloff.) Sander Levin (D) vs. William Milliken (R) WE CHOOSE not to make an endorsement for the gover- norship. Neither candidate has de- monstrated that it makes a dif- farence who wins. Sander Levin has been frankly disappointing as a challenger. Per- haps we expected too much, but he has consistantly failed us. He has opposed amnasty for those who have courageously fought the draft and the war we abhor. At the same time, he claims to be against the war. Grilled on his position, he expresses no moral stand on the war. He favors little more than a dreary desire for removal of American troops sometime in the near future. Governor Milliken has basically the same position. On the question of liberalization of marijuana laws, both candi- dates have unhesitatingly con- demned marijuana in no uncertain terms. Both, in the face of lack of personal exposure to the drug, have chosen from the mas of con- tradictory evidence about mari- juana, those research results which question the drug. Both call for "more information" and both support lessening the penal- Hc Phillip A. Hart (D) vs. Lenore Romney (R) INCUMBENT Sen. Hart's record and experience makes him an outstanding candidate who far outshines his less than mediocre opponent. We have faith that the people of Michigan understand this. Lenore Romney has demon- strated a belief in the misguided domestic priorities that have be- come the hallmark of her party, and will be little more than a slavish supporter of the Nixon ad- ministration's foreign policy. She has a blatant lack of sensitivity to blacks, youth, and the poor and the issues that concern these seg- ments. Our only reservations about Sen. Hart are those same reservations we have expressed on this page about the entire nature of the political system in this country. Within that system, however, Sen. Hart is a fine senator by any judgment. ties for possession or use of mar juana in the meantime. On the position of protection< the environment, Levin has somewhat better position. Whi Milliken certainly has not en braced pollution, he did veto a r( cent bill which would have r stricted sales of non-returnab bottles. Levin, on the other han has initiated and fought for legi, lation which allows private citizen to take court action against cor sumers. Both Levin and Milliken have a unquestioning attitude of awe respect for "law". They get nerN ous too easily when the expressio of civil rights borders on civil diE obedience. Both have an ove: whelmingly strong belief that a the changes needed in society ca be accomplished through, legisl tion, or in the voting booth. Ne ther is willing to give mass phy sical expression of opinion an credit for initiating change. Governor Milliken, in office f 18 months, has a mixed recori He has brought a number of bri liant young men to work for hin especially in the area of educatio reform. Yet, while announcing ne programs for educational reforn Milliken failed to do everything i his power to get them through th legislature. Similarly, while adopting an ad mirable stand for liberalizationc abortion laws, Milliken allowed to be defeated when two of h party's Senators defected on th final vote. That lack of leader ship is disturbing. recommenda tions evin i- Levin's stand on abortion is even more liberal, and he would, we of believe, be a more agressive execu- a tive in working for passage of le legislation. n- Levin favors a graduated income e- tax, a stand which is opposed by e- Milliken. We believe the grad- le uated income tax would be both d, fairer to the poor and bring more s- money to the state than the pres- ns ent straight percentage tax. The n- closer compliance of the grad- uated tax with the idea of "tax- n ation according to the ability to d pay" is a far more important con- r";...- v- sideration than is the remote pos-. : n sibility that some jobs will be lost s- as a result of the tax. We favor r- Levin's stand. n However, we question Levin's ability to assert himself as a lead-{.'>.,}. i_ er in Lansing - as his campaign slogans say he will. When Levin $ > ,.>." .-:,r spoke in Ann Arbor, he consistent- ly shied away from answering or taking forthright-stands on Sad L d. controversial issues, relying in- Of GU d- stead on verbal runarounds and , political double-speak. )n Therefore, although we find a E sch vs. a slighessues where there is a dif- n ference of opinion. But all to like- R. Michael Stillwagon (D) vs. Commis ze ly Levin, if elected, would have a Marvin Esch (R) increas narrow and precarious base of be dis .,. support. He would be forced, ala E URGE the election of R. al orga of Ann Arbor's disappointing Mayor Michael Stillwagon to the U.S. On tl it Harris, to throw too many bones House of Representativestprimar JS .otebrigdoso h ih While his opponent, incumbent welfare e to the barking dogs of the right Marvin Esch, supports withdrawal family; - wing to be effective in making of American troops from Indo- a year more than token changes. china by the middle of next year, contras 4j 4 49 Villiam Millikin *p et vs. Romney and has generally supported in- creased funding of domestic pro- grams, these votes have come against a background of general support for the foreign and dom- estic policies of the Nixon ad- ministration. Stillwagon, on the other hand. would support programs of more meaningful commitment to the poor~, of more fundamental im- portance to the thoroughgoing changes needed in our society. Besides supporting a virtually immediate withdrawal of troops from Indochina,nStillwagon sup- ports changes in foreign policy which would call for withdrawal support from rightist dictators, normalization of relations with tionalI tion pr mum in -a mu ment o In c has com ing an followi the dra homose: Stillw signific current licies th publican election ficanti trict's r ton. !wagon unist China and Cuba, and ed aid for development to ersed through internation- nizations. ;he domestic front, Esch is a y supporter of the Nixon program, which proposes aid up to the level of $1,600 for a family of four. By st, Stillwagon backs the Na- Welfare Rights Organiza- oposal for a $5,500 mini- .ncome for a family of four uch more realistic-assess- f the needs of the poor.' ontrast to Esch, Stillwagon rmmitted himself to support- mnesty for draft resisters ng an end to the war and aft, and equal rights for exuals. wagon expresses far more ant discontent with the direction of American no- han does his moderate Re- in opponent. We believe his would represent a signi- improvement in this dis- representation in Washing- 44 Smit vs. Koster Phillip Hart Lenore Romney IBnrsley vs. Sallade Donald Koster (D) vs. Raymond J. Smit (R) WE HEARTILY endorse the candidacy of Don Koster as state representative. His stand on state issues is consistently in the vanguard of those who favor sweeping changes. His personal character and aggressiveness to- wards those resistant to change should serve to shake up and stimulate a lethargic Legislature. Koster will work towards es- tablishing university education as a free right for all citizens. His opponent favors maintainenceof the current discriminatory and elitist system. Koster, exhibits a rare under- standing of the feelings and moods of students, and the rationale be- hind current campus dissent. His opponent has supported state leg- islation to repress student dem- onstrations. While both candidates favor liberalizing current abortion re- strictions, Smit's plan would re- quire they be performed in hos- pitals, effectively discriminating against those who cannot afford high hospitalization or insurance costs. Koster would work for reform of present welfare programs and tax structures in order to better serve the less fortunate elements in thestate. Hetadvocates a pro- gressive graduated income tax over the current flat rate tax. Smit opposes this reform. Koster favors radical reforms in drug laws which would take the control of drugs out of the hands of pushers and criminals and eliminate many of the crimes committed to support expensive habits. In sum, Koster's election would be a huge plus for the people of this district, and of \the state. 4 George Sallade (D) vs. Gilbert Bursley (R) JN THE LOCAL state senate race, neither candidate offers much appeal. Furthermore, there are no large ideological differences be- tween the two. Both have mixed politics. We support some of their programs, oppose others. Their lack of consistency bothers us. Bursley, after six years in the State senate, has su-h a mixed record. Like most politicians, he became actively interested in en- vironmental programs only after they became a popular cause. However, his long-range plans for mass transit and population and environmental control show fore- sight in dealing with problems that will undoubtedly confront the state in the next 10 years. His position on abortion reform has been admirable, and 'in the van- guard. However, his position on other issues of community concern are objectionable. He has opposed le- gislation that would institute re- form of our antiquated welfare' system. He has supported anti- union strike legislation and wire- tapping proposals. On the issues of law and order vs. Justice and equality, Bursley strikes out first for repression, and only secondly for the rights of citizens. His cri- ticism of the University last spring for not preventing class disrup- tions during the BAM strike came before 'he supported the general goals of the class strike. Sallade is also a curious mixture of politics. He is a former Repub- lican, who defected, and eventual- ly became head of the local Demo- cratic Party. He no longer holds that post. His support for a graduated in- come tax is commendable. He promises to support more spend- ing for education and welfare re- form, and supports control en polluters. Beyond that, however, he is vague. He supports liberal- ization of abortion laws. Salade was a partner with a group of local Ann Arbor citizens who pooled $80,000 to buy a property in the 2nd Ward in order to pre- vent the city from building low cost housing there. Neither candidate deserves a clear endorsement. Both -ire v,:t- eran Ann Arbor politicians with basically the same outlook. Don Koster Ray Smit UniversityR eets George Sallade Gilbert Bursley S ta tewide races and vo ter proposals See. of State THE SECRETARY of State's most important function as the role is currently defined is to hand out political plums to party functionaries. In this role, and in the basic admin- istration of the office, both Austin and Lockwood would perform in keeping Attorney General and his staff in this state to interpret the law. His rulings have the force of law until tested in court. With the notable exception of some politically motivated rulings on parochiaid-related ques- tions Frank Kelley has performed com- petently as the Attorney General for the past 10 years. Proposal A We urge a "YES" vote on Proposal A to allow the state to issue $100,000,- 000 worth of bonds to raise money for low-cost housing. This would repre- sent, just a begining in rectifying the housing situation in Michigan. Out of current funds and projected income, plicated decision on the ballot. The implications involved are far-reaching. In effect, Proposal C would ban any state-funded aid whatsoever to private or parochial schools. It is put forth by those who see such aid as a threat to the separation of the church and state, and is primarily aimed at preventing the establishment of a well-funded Supreme Court, Michigan is providing "auxiliary services" to private and parochial school systems. These serv- ices include bus transportation, visiting teacher programs, special education programs, medical care programs, and a host of other activities related to but not including direct instruction. Proposal C would ban these court- Paul Brown (D), James Waters (D) vs. Paul Goebel, Jr. (R), Jack Shuler (R) vs. Tom Vernier (SWP) Marcia Wisch (SWP) We would very much like to see the election of Tom Vernier and Marcia Wisch to the Board of Re- gents for a number of reasons. Both have consistently supported positions of fundamental reform of this University. They support University operated child care fa- cilities; a break with ROTC: an end to secret research and other Regental position. He wants to challenge that. His election would allow this. Despite our feelings, we realis- tically admit that the election of these two candidates is unlikely. For those who would like to make their vote a truly political act, a vote for these candidates would not go unheeded. The election of the two Repub- lican candidates to the Board would be a tragedy, and help to maintain the unresponsive con- descending nature of the current Board.