Y ... .
liM 4'dtgan 4Batl
Eighty years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
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.
TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 3, 1970
NIGHT EDITOR: STEVE KOPPMAN
Vote 'Yes' for annexations
and changes in city planning
IT IS DOUBTFUL whether any of the is-
sues on today's ballot are more confus-
ing than the three Ann Arbor annexation
proposals. That is unfortunate, because
in such a situation people tend to vote
"No," and all three proposals deserve a
"Yes" vote.
The issues at stake are substantial -
low cost housing, community planning
and a precedent ifor public control of the
private sector. Obscuring those consider-
ations are objections from environmental
groups, last spring's rejection of one of
the sites by city council and a simple lack
of knowledge.
All three areas under consideration are
slated for low cost housing projects, if
the proposals pass. A total of 700 units are
planned, some to be operated with a fed-
Endorsements
WE ENCOURAGE a vote for t h e
following candidates a n d pro-
posals in today's election:
-Philip A. Hart for U.S. Senator;
Richard Austin for Secretary of
State;
--R. Michael Stillwagon for U.S.
House of Representatives, Second
District;
-Don Koster f o r State Legisla-
ture, Fifty-third district;
-YES on proposal A for $100,000,-
000 in bonds for low-cost housing;
-YES on Proposal B for lowering
the voting age to 18.
-THE SENIOR EDITORS
eral rent subsidy program, others n o t.
City officials say the prospects for fund-
ing the projects are good, and in view of
the pity's tight housing situation, vitally
needed.
If the proposals are voted down, the
city would lose the chance to have any
control over the direction of development
in those areas. A likely result of unre-
stricted development would be the crea-
tion of more ugly un-zoned areas which
have already become a too-familiar part
of the American urban scene. The pros-
pective developers have indicated t h a t
they will build whether annexation pass-
es or not, so the question is not one of
houses vs. no houses, but control of de-
velopment vs. no control.
While one might well question the rec-
ord of planning boards, in Ann Arbor and
elsewhere, in this case at least, there is
an argument for city control.
In last spring's election, the city coun-
cil urged rejection of an annexation pro-
posal which is on the ballot again and
now being supported by council. During
the interim, city officials met repeatedly
w i t h the prospective developers of all
three areas and won some important con-
cessions from them. The 1i s t includes:
provisions for school sites, sidewalks for
children outside the development areas,
payment for utility expansion and pro-
vision for park space - all costs to be
borne by the developers.
AT PRESENT, those agreements are on-
ly verbal, but they are widely known
enough that the builders would find it
very difficult to back out. However, if the
proposals lose, backing out would not be
necessary because nothing would be bind-
ing.
Those successful negotiations are the
reason for council's reversal on its stand
last spring. They represent what could be
an important precedent for public con-
trol of the private sector. Although it is
presently a side issue, t h a t precedent
could in time become the most significant
aspect of today's annexation vote because
of the change in thinking which it rep-
resents.
The precedent set by the city in gain-
ing the concessions from the developers
represents a significant departure f r o m
the old "Gung Ho" school of urban ex-
pansion. Rejection of the annexation
proposals would constitute, at 1 e a s t in
part, a rejection of a refreshing move to-
ward sanity in city planning.
The enviromental objections to the an-
nexations become moot points when it
becomes clear that the development will
take place regardless of the annexation
vote. Nor can it be effectively argued that
annexation will help t h e developers or
hurt the city by requiring city water and
sewage service.
A NEW STATE LAW, which the city is
presently fighting, will require cities
to provide services in s u c h situations,
whether the land is annexed or not. Fur-
thermore, one of the townships in which
one of the areas lies has already petition-
ed the state for money to build its own
sewage system.
A "No" vote, then, will mean the loss of
about 700 badly-needed units of low-cost
housing, the concessions already gained,
any prospect for future planning control
and a potentially valuable precedent.
But a "No" vote will not stop the develop-
ment, barring some unforseen miracle, of
an area such as exists along Washtenaw
east of I-94.
A "Yes" vote w i l1 avoid those losses,
while helping to provide for areas of mix-
ed lower and middle class housing, with
restricted business areas, parks, side-
walks and schools.
Vote "Yes" for proposals E, F, and G.
-ROB BIER
Associate Managing Editor
"A tragedy of minor proportions has occurred."
-Lieut. Gen. William R. Peers, March 1970
Letters to The Daily
Response
To the Daily:
THE CRITICISM OF the Uni-
versity's Opportunity Program by
Black Students' Union Chairman
Wesley (Daily, Oct. 29) deserves
perhaps a brief response. S i n c e
last April, the Center for Afro-
American Studies has been fund-
ed and a director employed; a
group of black graduate students
have organized a coalition for the
Utilization of Learning Skills and
have been financed in their en-
deavor by the University; the Op-
portunity Program staff h a s
been augmented by 10 additional
staff (more are being recruited).
some in central offices and others
in the individual schools and col-
leges; and earmarked financial aid
from University funds for the pro-
gram has been doubled.
A COMPLETE REPORT of pro-
gress to date was made to the Re-
gents at their October meeting in
a public document which has been
summarized in the press. Black
admissions officers, frequently as-
sisted by student volunteers, are
regularly visiting inner city
schools and with good success. Al-
ready this fall, increased enroll-
ments of qualified minority stu-
dents havebeenrecorded in sev-
eral graduate and professional
schools. The student-faculty-ad-
ministration Opportunity Commit-
tee, too, is meeting regularly and
is actively planing increased sup-
portive services.
-Stephen IH. Spurr,
Vice President and Dean
of the Graduate School
Oct. 30
Annexation
To the Daily:
ON THE November 3rd ballot,
there will be three proposals for
annexation of land to the City
of Ann Arbor. If annexed, one of
these parcels will have a mix of
housing and a large portion will
be medium income housing. A se-
cond parcel is planed to be
entirely medium income housing
and the third will have some low
income housing.
An elementary rule of econom-
ocs is that prices go up as demand
exceeds supply. The demand for
housing is high in Ann Arbor.
Even the well-to-do are finding
housing prices and taxes on the
value of their property very high.
Certainly it would be in the best
interests of students, young peo-
ple beginning their own homes-,
and all medium and low income
persons to help the city obtain land
so that the supply of housing can
be increased to help meet the
demands.
All registered voters in the City
of Ann Arbor are eligible to vote
on this question. Vote "YES" on
all three annexation proposals at
the top of the ballot.
-Mrs. Eunice Burns
Milliken
To the Daily:
SUNDAY'S EDITORIAL did not
endorse Governor Milliken for re-
election. One of the reasons given
was that two Republicans defected
on the final vote for abortion re-
form and the writers "found this
lack of leadership disturbing." In
effect, they are criticizing Gover-
nor Milliken for failing to make
sure that each Republican legis-
lator voted to support an issue
which he (Governor Milliken)
supported.
In 1972, The Michigan Daily
undoubtedly will not endorse Vice-
President Agnew for re-election.
One of the reasons that will be
given is that several Republican
Congressmen who failed to sup-
port the Nixon Administration
were openly criticized by V i c e-
President Agnew. In effect, the
editors will be (and already are)
criticizing Vice-President Agnew
for attempting to make sure that
each Republican legislator voted
to support issues which he (Vice-
President Agnew) supported.
You can't win for losing.
-George T. Wilson
Credibility
To the Daily:
DAVE CHUDWIN'S front page
article, "U' Remote Sensing ..."
(O c t. 28, 1970) demonstrates
many aspects of good and socially
responsible journalism. Much more
of this is certainly needed to pro-
vide the eternal vigilance that an
open society requires. The vigil-
ance also requires, however, that
t h e sources of information be
credible; and there is at least one
aspect of Chudwin's article that
raises a question of credibility.
Your bold face type insert on
page 8 reports that William
Brown hopes the University's' re-
search has had a "not negligible
impact" on modern military re-
connaisance systems. Chudwin's
reporting of the interview, how-
ever, has Brown saying something
that appears quite different. Just
above the insert we see Brown
hoping that the "not negligible
impact" has been on the use of
sensors and infrared radar. This
is then followed by the statement,
"It is fair to say that some of the
technology we've been developing
h a s influenced modern military
reconnaisance systems." (In this
last statement I detect the good
journalist leading the interview in
the search for the jugular.)
The inversion of the statements
has an obvious significance. Old
Joe McCarthy would h a v e ap-
plauded this hair-splitting change,
especially if it were deliberate. I
should argue, of course, that the
inversion clearly weakens the
credibility of the article, especial-
ly if it were deliberate. If the in-
version were inadvertant, howev-
er, the charge shifts to one of in-
competence, presenting the editor
himself with a serious problem.
-Gayl D. Ness
Associate Professoi
oftSociology
Oct. 28
Inequities
To the Daily:
WHAT ARE THE inherent in-
equities of our system? As I walk-
ed through the diag today, I saw
hundreds of people j u s t sitting
and talking and throwing frisbees
and footballs. Beautiful? To be
debated.
However, I also saw some work-
men in the diag. Men in their late
middle ages, raking leaves a n d
gathering t h e m with vacuum'
trucks. Some of them had paused
and were, looking at the students,
or rather kids, playing football
and frisbee. Why did they have to
work while the students played?
Whereare the students' morals?
They speak of equality; where is
it? Certainly not on the college
campus.
Support free love?
Vote Sinclair Gov.
By WALTER SHAPIRO
Assistant Editorial Director, 1968-69
TODAY'S ELECTION DAY. And what are all of you who have been
complaining about the spiritual bankruptcy of the Democratic
Party going to do?
That's right, you're going to vote the straight Democratic ticket.
All the way from dynamic Sander Levin for governor to fresh, new
face, George Wahr Sallade for state representative.
It's easy to see why. After all nobody who smokes dope, reads
"Rolling Stone" and talks about the cultural revolution, votes Republi-
can. And all those "Socialist" parties cluttering up the ballot, remind
you of sad, pathetic old men giving away "The Weekly People" on street
corners. Memories of ninth grade civics books and League of Women
Voters pamphlets just won't let you just not vote for certain offices,
so what else can you do?
THE ONLY PROBLEM with this kind of reasoning is that it re-
wards the Democratic Party for nominating mediocre candidates. Why
not run a whole ticket of Sander Levins next time? - we'll all vote the
straight Democratic ticket anyway. Using just this kind of reasoning,
an unrepentent Hubert Humphrey eventually captured almost all the
McCarthy primary votes in November 1968:
At a time when Democratic gubernatorial candidates like Jack
Gilligan in neighboring Ohio have
been attempting to deal creatively
with state problems, Levin h a s
spent the campaign trying out his
new contact lenses, avoiding the
parochiaid issue, opposing am-
nesty for returning Canadian vet-
erans, attacking Miliken for be-
ing a big spender, praying that
Phil Hart's coat-tails are 1o n g
enough, and promising to be more
effective in fighting the scourge
of drug traffic.
Although Milliken has done lit-
tle to arouse intense enthusiasm
in hisatwo years in office, he has
been a definite improvement over
the "other" Romney. And against
the backdrop of the turgid Levin
campaign, only the most fervent
Democratic Party loyalists can
provide a rationale why Levin's John Sinclair
election would make a difference.
REFUSING TO VOTE for Levin is one way of telling the Demo-
cratic Party that when they nominate gutless, issueless conviction-
less media candidates, they lose your vote.
So we've got a new problem, what do you do with that vote? Not
voting clearly accomplishes nothing. Voting for Milliken merely lumps
you with Pontiac insurance agents and Grand Rapids hardstore owners.
So where does that leave you?
For starters when you go to vote, bring a sharp pencil. Then how
about writing in White Panther leader John Sinclair for Governor?
Sounds frivolous? Just close your eyes and imagine what would
happen Wednesday morning if Levin awoke to find himself Governor?
First he'd check to make sure he wasn't wearing his rose-colored con-
tact lenses, then he'd start planning his powerbroker role for the 1972
Democratic Convention, and finally he'd start looking for a really top
notch advertising agency to run the state Government.
Whether he wins or not, John Sinclair, Michigan's leading political
prisoner, will wake up Wednesday morning in Marquette state prison
where he is serving a 10 year sentence for minor violations of the state
marijuana laws.
IF HE SHOULD wake up Wednesday as Governor, Sinclair could
pardon himself - thereby cutting out the mi1dle man.
John Sinclair has not sought the august office of the Governor
of this glorious state. His campaign expenditures have been minimal.
He has not made a single campaign appearance outside of Marquette.
But a write-in vote for John Sinclair today would be a symbolic ges-
ture against restrictive drug laws, strident cries for law and order and
the repression of local political leaders.
BUT PERHAPS more importantly, writing-in John Sinclair for
Governor would be kind of fun. And, honestly now, when was the last
time you had fun in a voting booth?
,e
The '70 campaigns:
Promises, promises ..
By MICHAEL SCHNECK
FOR THE PAST two months, we have been inundated by a tre-
mendous amount of canned speeches and promises which con-
stitute political campaigns. The fact that the American people are able
to stand such nonsense every year attests to either the hardiness of
their constitution or the impenetrability of their minds.
What has been the message of the campaign this year? The mes-
sage is "trust me."
All of us have been brought up on the great American principle
that people should exercise their constitutional prerogatives by voting
for the candidates of their choice. By so voting, we are told, we will
be expressing our will and the policy of the government will reflect
the will of the voters. But is this realy true?
LIBERAL CANDIDATES say vote for me. We will bring
happiness and prosperity to the land. We will end the injustices of our
country. Yet, no one is able to forget the Bay of Pigs, an act of
imperialism committed by the liberal Kennedy.
When senator George McGovern was here, he said liberals have
learned from their mistakes. He asked to be trusted - to be given
another chance. Yet what can the public expect from liberals? The
biggest change seen in this campaign year has been the liberal posi-
tion on social unrest. That paragon of liberalism - Kennedy of Mas-
sachusetts - moves to the right constantly denouncing violence. Hum-
phrey, supposedly one of the greatest liberals, dons a hard hat.
On the other hand, President Nixon also seeks our trust. Trust
me to bring the nation together. Yet Nixon's administration has used
every conceivable scare and fear tactic to divide this country. The
President has made people distrustful of one another and of their
own children.
TWO YEARS AGO, Richard Nixon asked us to trust his secret
plan to end the war in Vietnam. The American people trusted him
and now two years later the war continues and 10,000 Americans have
died since Nixon has taken office.
Politicians have discovered within the past few months that young
people as well as old people are not interested in their campaigns. As
Senator Philip/ Hart said, "If the voter ever had the opportunity to
vote for none of the above, the political system would be destroyed."
WHY IS there such distrust and apathy to politicians? One of the
main reasons must be Vietnam. As Professor Nathan Glazer of Har-
vard writes:
"It (Vietnam) has made America an evil country in the eyes
of its youth. It has changed all the terms of political discourse.
A
*
A
15:
Join the SDS protest in Detroit
to increase awareness about GM
ONCE AGAIN today we will witness two
events prominent in the American
political scene. Intimately connected,
some fail to see their similarities as well
as their differences. Repetitive -in nature,
many have become so anestheticized by
their recurrence of these events they
fail to take note of them. The two events
are first, the biennial elections and se-
cond, a scheduled demonstration in De-
troit. It would serve us well then, to
re-examine the significance of each
event.
Not long age, there was little dispute'
over the value of our system of electoral
politics. The belief was that "the best
man" would always win because the peo-
ple's judgment could see past the "crook-
ed" politicians, leaving a candidate un-
blemished by political pressures.
However, something has happened since
then. Perhaps it started with McCarthy
and Chicago and the seeming inability of
large masses of young people to change
anything in the political bureaucracy
they lived under. Today's SDS demonstra-
tion in Detroit against General Motors
is possible that a large non-violent crowd
could demonstrate the degree to which
people are reacting against GM policies
of exploitation - both in the way they
contribute to the war effort overseas and
the war on our environment; second
their presence could force a direct re-
sponse from General Motors to the charg-
es, rather than a convenient cloud of
phrases and easy justifications.
Though it is unlikely these goals will be
achieved, the possibility exists that the
demonstrations can force out a state-
ment from GM which exposes its pur-
suit of profits at the expense of the wel-
fare of its workers. And the benefits of
this statement are that it can inform
people of the true nature of General
Motors policies. Thus, it is important to
join today's demonstration - despite the
general apathy surrounding the situa-
tion - with the hope in mind that more
people will be informed of GM's capi-
talistic beliefs.
The trap the marchers must avoid is
the abundance of "revolutionary rhe-
toric" which says nothing. Specific goals
m~c- h n1+14 nrl.vs a n+ n n +
-Stuart L. Cohen,
Oct. 23
'74
4
The cynics'
campaign
"I sit on a man's back,
choking him and making him
carry me and yet assure my-
self and others that I am very
sorry for him and wish to light-
en his load by all possible means
-except by getting off his
back."
-Leo Tolstoy
By RICK PERLOFF
THE OFFICE is small, its lan-
guage is soft, but don't let
that fool you. The Committee to
Support Cynicism keeps working.
In fact, many radicals who
marched last year and campaigned
in '68 belong. They call it the
Great Silent Minority.
Oh, you don't hear much about
this committee. But you shouldn't
expect to. Cynics are quiet by na-
Today they say "we don't have all
the answers." But now that's their
answer. Their solution is the lack
of one: despair,
After Kent, Cambodia and more
Nixon, things became frustrating.
Old solutions disintegrated, the
new one appeared. The System
was evil, onlyttoo big. Politics were
there, only too real. Meaningful
change is impossible. The answer
to hopelessness is more hopeless-
ness. Cynicism, not communism, is
the answer this year.
The Committee continues. It
groans about Weathermen, it
cringes at elections: n o t h i n g
works. It philosophizes:
If the Pentagon was demolished
tomorrow, what would Cronkite
say? "A group of militants lay fire
to the Pentagon. destroving all the
THE COMMITTEE is bothered by
this, but not very much. It refuses
involvement. Members won't dirty
their hands nor leave the shield of
cynicism to meet change. That's
too hard. This is easy. The System
is massive. Who wants to get
hurt?
B u s t s over trashing are no
longer a concern; depressing elec-
tion results are part of the past.
Neither disturbs anymore; nothing
disturbs, nothing involves.
Except maybe despair. They
must work at this too. Must re-
inforce skepticism, continue to
complain. The country's corrupt;
the world is dying. What can be
done?
Wish they could help, but
they've located the answer, and
AW