100%

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

Share

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.

March 30, 1974 - Image 6

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
Michigan Daily, 1974-03-30

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

94 aitian a tn
Eighty-Four Years of Editorial Freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

lettersle tters lettersle tters le ttersleti

420 Maynard St., Ann Arbor, Mi. 48104

News Phone: 764-0552

SATURDAY, MARCH 30, 1974

Hungry have rights too

WEN MOST OF US think of minimum
daily requirements, we think of the
side panels of our Wheaties and Trix
boxes listing how much B vitamin, ribo-
flavin and iron our body needs.
But for thousands in the world, mini-
mum daily requirement is met by a cup
of some form of starch spooned into their
stomachs, a cup of rice once a day or
enough water to keep their mouths from
gumming shut.
The pictures of thin, bloated-belly,
shoeless children stare accusingly out of
magazine pages, usually urging our con-
sciences to "adopt" these children long-
aistance. But after reading the ad and
closing the magazine, their faces, their
empty stomachs and matching lives are
easy to forget.
Most Americans have no idea what
hunger is. As close as most of us come to
it is the growling produced by a de-
layed lunch or a skipped breakfast.
A STAGGERING TWO AND A half bil-
lion people in the world lack enough
food to keep them healthy, let alone sat-
isfied. Satisfaction to the point of com-
fort or indigestion is an unheard-of lux-
ury to two-thirds of the worlds stomachs.
The politics of world hunger are more
than gastronomically distressing. Those
in the world with the most money, com-
forts, conveniences and advantages not
surprisingly have the best-stocked pan-
tries and best-lined bellies.
Disproportionate a m o u n t s of the
world's food ends up on U. S. Highways
being trucked to the nation's Krogers
and A&P's. Distribution of the world's

food is not based on the empty levels in
a iation's stomachs, but the fill level in
the nation's wallets.
One third of the world uses two thirds
of the world's food - and we belong to
that one third. In no other country is
over supply of food the problem it is
here. Vic Tanny, Diet Pepsi, Dr. Stillman
and Playtex girdles have made their for-
tunes from overfed, stuffed people
stretching their seams.
HAVE LITTLE MEANS for compre-
hending the severity of the world
food crisis. It does no good to push the
last piece of meat loaf on the plate of a
recalcitrant child with the warning that
there are starving children in India. And
it does less good to package last week's
leftovers in Tupperware and send them
air mail to Djakarta.
The hungry and starving have a right
to be fed if the food exists. And since
hunger is ultimately a question of sur-
vival when it is not appeased, the hun-
gry may not wait for the food to be
shipped in CARE packages. The revolt
may have already begun with the kid-
naping of the children of the token
wealthy. We may yet see a massive revo-
lution by the desperately hungry, angry
that their children die while we stuff
Hostess twinkies down our flabby throats.
The Green Revolution does not deal
with corn and rice, but with currency in
thousand dollar denominations. And the
term Green Revolution may prophesy the
coming onslaught of the bony enraged
masses demanding ample blood be paid
for the years they have, spent breadless.
-BETH NISSEN

Tenure reform needed

AT THE RISK OF losing flexibility, it is
time for the Literary College (LSA)
to level with its departments and facul-
ty. For although Dean Rhodes and others
claim that economic factors are not af-
fecting individual tenure decisions, it is
clear that the economic environment in
which those decisions are being made is
affecting the entire tenure-granting
process.
As the University enters its no-growth
state and as the LSA College approaches
an all-tenured faculty, it is true that
granting tenure to a new candidate is a
very serious matter. A candidate can now
lose out if it is thought that the college
can in the future attract an even higher
quality candidate.
Editorial Staff
DANIEL SDDLE
Editor in Chief
JUDY RUSKIN and REBECCA WARNER
Managing Editors
TONY SCHWARTZ .................... Sunday Editor
MARTIN PORTER .................... Sunday Editor
SUE STEPHENSON..................Feature Editor
MARNIE HEYN .................... Editorial Director
CINDY HILL ...................... Executive Editor
KENNETH FINK...... ... .Arts Editor
STAFF WRITERS: Prakash Aswani, Gordon Atcheson,
Laura Berman, Dan Biugerman, Howard Brick,
Bonnie Carnes, Charles Coleman Barb Cornell,
Jeff Day, Della DiPietro, Mike Duweck, Ted Evan-
off, Matt Gerson, William Heenan, Steve Hersh,
Jack Krost, Andrea Lilly, Mary Long, Jean Love,
Jeff Luxenberg, Josephine Marc otty, Beth Nissen,
Cheryl Pilate; Ann Rauma, Sara Rimer, Jim
Schuster, Bob Seidenstein, Stephen Selbst, Chip
Sinclair, Jeff Sorensen, David Stoll, Paul Ter-
williger.
DAILY WEATHER BUREAU: William Marino and Den-
nis Dismachek (forecasters)
Business Staff
MARK SANCRAINTE
Business Manager
LINDA ROSS .................... Operations Manager
AMY KANENGISER ............... Display Manager
SUE DeSMET ..............Finance Manager
DEPT. MORS.: LaurIe Gross, Ellen Jones, Cassie St.
Clair
ASSOC. MGRS.: Rob Cerra, Niles Fleischer, Lisa
Kanengiser, Kathy Keller, Debby Novess
ASST. MGRS.: Karen Copeland, Barb Kowalski, Liz
Kurnetz, Nancy Ross, Dave Schwartz
STAFF: Beth Phillips, Rosanne Lapinski
SALESPEOPLE: Mike Bingen, Susan Goldstick, Emily
Hirf, Bill Koopman, Eric Phillips, Andi Yakushav
Photography Staff
THOMAS GOTTLIEB
Chief Photographer

Obviously the college can and should be
more choosy in awarding tenure as the
pool of capable teachers expands. What
is wrong is that LSA is still trying to per-
petrate the myth that the system is not
competitive even though market condi-
tions indicate the opposite.
JUST NOW A COLLEGE Priorities Com-
mittee is starting to rationally plan,
with the aid of the departments, the
rumber of professorships they will al-
locate among the departments of the fu-
ture. This is necessary because of the
ro-growth state of the college and be-
cause of enrollment shifts among the de-
partments.
In the face of this, however, LSA pre-
fers to maintain the tenure system which
is leading to the all-tenured college.
The results could be bitter department-
al infighting to control the possible all-
tenured departments of the future, as
has been the case of the English depart-
ment, general discontent with LSA on the
part of still more departments, and the
oxploitation of assistant professors who
have served the University without being
fairly appraised of their chance for at-
taining tenure.
As the college drifts to an all-tenured
faculty we must ask where the impetus
to modify the current system lies.
UNFORTUNATELY, THE political power
rests with the already tenured pro-
fessors. Certainly they would have a
stake in maintaining the status quo.
At the point of an all-tenured faculty
the main sufferers will not be assistant
professors because they hardly will be
any. The University's reputation will
suffer, but the real losers will be the
students of the future.
The tenure system must be modified
iow before it is too late. Various options
are open. One could be refusing all future
tenure past a certain point and instead
only hiring faculty members under short
of long-term contracts, depending on
needs foreseen by planners.
Meanwhile, LSA must admit that all
qualified assistant professors will not
necessarily be hired because of new high-
er standards reflecting the job market,
before more assistant professors have to
face this cruel fact with little but a sense
of frustration and the knowledge that
they have been deceived.
AT LEAST IT IS A hopeful sign that
rational planning for the college and
its departments has begun.
-BOB SEIDENSTEIN

Richman
To The Daily:
IN AN ARTICLE in The Daily,
Democratic Council candidate
Mary Richman is quoted as admit-
ting that she used to eat non-Unit-
ed Farmworkers lettuce, but that
she has "not done so in the last
five months."'She also claimed to
be sorry to have eaten the non-
union lettuce.
I live in the Law Quad, and eat
there, as does Mary Ricman. The
Law Quad is the only dorm which
refuses to boycott non-UFW head
lettuce, and as a result, people who
eat at the Law Quad have the op-
portunity to scab on the UFW at
every meal. As Mary's statement
in the Daily admits, she was one
of the people who took advantage
of this opportunity (every day).
However, Mary's statement is
unfortunately incomplete, and per-
haps misleading. Firstly, she does
not say that the Law Quad fre-
quently provided an alternative to
the scab lettuce - that is, a
greens salad consisting of es-
carole, bib lettuce, and other non-
head lettuce greens. She passed up
this opportunity to symbolically
boycott the scab lettuce served at
the Law Quad, and instead consist-
ently ate he stab lettuce.
SECONDLY, MARY'S asrdon
that she has not eaten scab let-
tuce for the past five months is in-
correct. While eating in the same
dining room as she does, I have ob-
served her eat scab lettuce several
times during the current semester.
The most recent incident was late
in February. The bins containg
the scab lettuce and the inoffen-
sive greens salad are separate and
clearly marked, so I am sur of
the accuracy of my observations.
I might also add that although
Mary claims to support the letuce
boycott and the UFW, I have nev-
er heard or seen her attempt to
convince anyone to boycott the
scab lettuce served at the L aw
Quad.
In sum, it would seem that Mary
Richman has a very unusual con-
ception of what it means to sup-
port the lettuce boyott and 'he
UFW.
-Alan Kaufman
Law, '74
March 27, 1974
To The Daily:
I HAVE BEEN following t h e
Second Ward City Council Cam-
paign with great intere t for the
past month and have attended a
number of candidate debates be-
tween Kathy Kozachenk of the
H.R.P. and the Democrats' Mary
Richman.
What strikes me most about these
debates is the totally flippant and
unconcerned attitude of Richm an.
Where Kozachenko seems to have
done some preparation on the is-
sues, Mary Richman always seems
unprepared. She always starts out
saying "I'm supposed to say some-
thing but I don't have anything
ready."
Kathy Kozachenko, at least,
shows some real concern for t h e
people she is speaking to and the
ward she hopes to represent. She
seems to know what she is talking
about and has some good ideas
about what City Council should do.
Mary Richman, on th o t h e r
hand, appears to be more concern-
ed about getting the detate over
with so that she can "go out drink-
ing with a really nice guy I met
canvassing." I can just se her in
the middle of some really import-
ant City Council meeting saying
(as I've heard her say at a num-
ber of discussions) "Let get this
over with before the bars close."
-Ginny duRivage
Second Ward Voer
Dope
To The Daily:

THE QUESTION of the $5 dope
lbw raises some interesting ques-
tions which have not been fully
examined. Most of the Democrats
and all of the Human Rights Party
candidates have come out in fav-
of the amendment in an attempt
to bring out the student vote.
And why is it that the students
seem to be backing this ordinance
so heavily? Is it because they like
to toke up? Is it because they
want an end to prosecution with
respect to the so-called victimless
crimes.
Yes, these are the reasons that
these fuzzy thinkers give for their
stand on this dubious proposal.
The supporters of this amendment
will be here, a good number of
them, for four years.
If they get their $5 dope law
then they can get high in peace
with no fear of harassment, and
then they leave after awhile, leav-
ing what will surely become a ruin-
ed city. Have any of them stopped
to think about the seriousness of
their proposal?
What is it going to do to Ann
Arbor? I'll tell you what it's go-
ing to do, it's going to turn it into
a major center for drug traffic
in the midwest. The coming of a
lot of drug dealers and users can
only serve to increase the crime
rate and nothing else. The deal-
ers and users will come here for
the obvious reason that they wi1l
have almost no fear of b a i a g

who have a stake in what goes on
in this community for many many
years to come, unlike most of these
'Johnny-come-lately' one-worldeis
who now infest our city.
Don't get me wrong. Pim not
knocking dope. The idea of legaliz-
ing dope on a national or state-
wide level is a good idea and I'm
all in favor of it.
But those who think that the best
place to start is right here in Ann
Arbor show a remarkable amount
of naivete. It can only bring a
strong influx of those only seek-
ing to 'get a buzz' without getting
busted. Is this a positive step for
our city? Will it mean a better
environment for all living in this
city, or will it only serve the pur-
poses of those who use marijuana?
I would say that this proposal is
the "zenith of mongoloid reason-
ing.,
ANOTHER QUESTION that must
be raised by the coming elelon
is, do we want more gay people
representing us on city council? I
would have no objections to gay
people at all if they would be
peaceful and not flaunt their sex-
uality like a new car, but no, they
insist on making a show and car-
rying on in public and at council
meetings like so many children
who have been cheated out of trick
or treats.
Do these people take a mature
approach to their problems? Are
they dignified and resigne when
they fail in their ridiculous cam-
paigh to turn the Rubayat into a
'gay restaurant'? No, they raise
hell and act ridiculous like they
thought savoir faire was a French
poet.
Did we see the Renublicans
throw a tantrum when the d o p e
law was first enstated several
years back when they did not have
a council majority? I ask you, did
anybody get assaulted with a cher-
ry pie then? Later, when the shoe
was on the other foot, all that the
Republicans got was a lot of sit,
like they were attempting Lo put
ten five-year-old little boys to bed
at the same time.
LIKE MY analogies? I'm sure
you won't like my letter, and I
doubt you'll want to print it, see-
ing how it doesn't exactly coin-
cide with your editorial fe ings,
but I do think that some of these
questions should be evaluated by
the people, and I hope they'll make
a sane choice on April 1.
-Richard Kharl
Rent control
To The Daily:
LET'S SET the record straight
on rent control. This HRP-support-
ed measure, which supposedly
helps "the people," really favors
large landlords and discriminaes
against small landlords. The pe-
ple who would be most hurt by
the passage of rent control would
be small landlords who have work-
ed for years to pay off their mort-
gages and who work on nights and
weekends doing their own mainten-
ance.
Here's how rent control would
actually work. A big landlord can
hire other people to do his main-
tenance work. He is allowed to
collect 150 per cent of this from
his tenants. A small landlord does
his own maintenance. He can
collect nothing for this. A big land-
lord uses leverage so that he pays
a minimum down payment on his
property and a bank finances the
rest. He can collect 100 per cent of
his huge principal and interest pay-
ments from his tenants.
A small landlord may owe very
little on his property or may own
it free and clear. If he does not
owe any principal and interest pay-
ments to the bank, then he can't
collect anything from his tenants
on his property investment. His
only profit on a building w o r t h

$25,000 or $30,000 will be 50 per-
cent of his maintenance costs, per-
haps only $50 to $100 if his build-
ing is in good shape and he does
all his own work.
HRP TALKS about 14 per cent
profit - HAH! His profit is less
than 1 per cent. So what can he
do? Sell out, obviously. But the
proposed rent control law doesn't
even let him do that. Anyone who
buys property is not allowed to re-
cover principal and interest pay-
ments than those paid by the sell-
er in August 1972 to July 19/3 un
les he gets permission from the
rent control board.
People are going to chink tw;ce
about buying rented property if
they have to go through a big rent
control bureaucracy to get their
mortgage rates approved, so pro-
perty prices will go down and the
small landlord will lose more mon-
ey when he tries to sell. The HRP
will get him both ways - - he won't
be able to make a profit if he
keeps his property and he'll lose
money if he sells
The big landlords, witn h i g ni
leverages, and the slum landlords,
with high maintenance costs, will
still make their profits under rent
control. It's the small landlords
who take pride in their property
who will bethurt. I say vote. NO
on rent control.
-Sandra J. Rice

mining profits. The HRP does not
have this data either, but rent
control proponents describe pro-
fits in emotional terms ranging
from "excessive" to "immoral" to
"enormous."
An anonymous writer in t he
Michigan Daily last week claim-
ed a banker told him annual pro-
fits should be 10 per cent to 14
percent of the total purchase price
of the property. I quoted this to
a management firm, a banker, a
lawyer, and an accountant. They
all told me I had misread t h e
article; the figures actually re-
ferred to the down payment, not
the purchase price. I told them the
article emphasized the figures re-
ferred to the purchase price. They
all told me such a return was im-
possible and that no banker would
make such an absurd statement.
One said if any banker made such
a claim, "he must be senile." The
figures they gave me on after tax-
es profits ranged from 8 to 15
per cent of the landlord's down
payment.
Proponents of rent control claim
the proposal allows the landlord
a 14 per cent return on his in-
vestment. This is simply not true.
The actual formula for calculat-
ing profits, which ties profits to
the amount of maintenance per-
formed, makes it impossible to
ever achieve a 14 per cent return.
Studies done over many years
over the whole United States show
that maintenance costs on a typi-
cal house average 2 to 3 per cent
per year of the purchase price of
the house. Maintenance on a mo-
dern apartment complex built
largely of concrete and brick would
be relatively less than for a house.
Also, the purchase price per rental
unit would be lower for a com-
plex than for a house. A little fig-
uring will show that if annual
maintenance costs are 2 to 3 per
cent of the purchase price and al-
lowed profit is equal to SO per
cent ofthe maintenance costs;
then in order to make a 14 per
cent return on the down payment,
the down payment can only be 7
to 10 per cent of the purchase
price. Lending institutions current-
ly require a 30 per cent dow n
payment, meaning profits would
be less than 5 per cent - less
than a savings account earns. In
addition,mortgage interest rates are
currently 9 per cent or more. The
proposal only allows 8 per cent to
be considered as part of the costs.
The additional 1 per cent interest
payments must come from the al-
ready greatly reduced "profits".
Actual profits may be restrict-
ed in another way. Claims that
the proposal allows a 14 per cent
return on the downpayment are an
incorrect simplification of what the
proposal actually says: The maxi-
mum profit allowed is 14 per cent
or twice the assessed valuation
minus all encumbrances. T h i s
means if the purchase price is
greater than twice the assessed
valuation (and a bank may ap-
praise property at a greater value
than the city), the maximum pro-
fit allowed will be less than 14
per cent of the down payment.
Since the city only assesses pro-
perty every three to four years,
and inflation is (well) over 5 per
cent per year, the assessed valua-
tion could be 40 per cent or less
of the purchase price. As an exam-
ple (probably an extreme exam-
ple), the assessed valuation of the
house I am living in is equal to
onlys35 per cent of the purchase
price. The down payment woull
thus have to exceed 30 per cent of
the purchase price of this house
to allow any profit at all.
HRP literaturetsays the average
landlord keeps ten cents on the
dollar (10kper cent) of gross rent
receipts. The Tenants Union says
rent cotnrol should lower rents
15 per cent. Even those who think
"profit" is a dirty word should
realize that while the government

may be able to afford to subsidize
housing, the individual investors in
Ann Arbor cannot. By preventing
reasonable profits, rent control will
cause disinvestment in rental hoti G-e
ing in Ann Arbor, discourage new
construction, and cause conversion
of existing rental units to other
uses such as single family dwel-
ings, condominiums, and offices.
-Richard Wolfe
March 25
To The Daily:
THE GHOST of Watergate has
come to haunt Ann Arbor in this
year's contest between proponents
of rent control and local housing
moguls. The revelations which
have occurred over the past week
concerning the largeamounts of
money being spent by landlords
trying to defeat rent control - as
well as the questionable sources of
much of the funds - should ser-
iously call into question the sin-
cerity of "Citizens for G o o d
Housing" and their expressed con-
cern for the welfare of tenants and
home owners of Ann Arbor.
For example, if rent control is so
obviously bad for both tenants and
home owners, why do the manage-
ment companies and realtors in-
volved in the anti-rent control cam-
paign feel that it is necessary to
spend an incredible $43,000 f o r
their campaign against Proposal
A?

ments ($1,500), Standard R e a 1 t y
Corp. ($1,800), and the Ann Ar-
bor Board of Realtors ($1,000)?
I THINK THAT the reasons are
pretty clear - and should be clear
to all the voters of the city. The
people who stand to lose when rent
control goes into effect are the real
estate speculators, who have been
cleaning up on the housing short-
age which Ann Arbor suffers, and
the big management companies,
which will have their sky-high pro-
fits returned to a more reasonable
level by the rent control plan.
Some home owners will probably
be convinced by the righ priced
advertising campaign being funded
by these special interest groups,
but it is my hope that the majority
of both tenants and home owners
will be able to see beyond the self-
serving arguments of the housing
industry and will perceive that rent
control is necessary in Ann Arbor,
that it will help make reasonably
priced housing available to those
who need it, and will improve the
quality of life in our city.
Look at the facts, ignore the
scare tactics, and vote YES on
rent control April 1st!
-David Goodman
March 27
endorsement
To The Daily:
THE DAILY'S endorsement of
most of the HRP candidates comes
as no surprise to long-time readers.
The Daily has endorsed every
HRP candidate who's had any
chance of winning, and quite a
few who could only throw races to
the Republicans, including the one
who put the much-hated C. Wil-
iam Colburn in his present seat
two years ago.
But even so, this year's endorse-
ments are surprisingly inaccurate,
inconsistent and propagandistic.
HRP's Beth Brunton is given cre-
dit for opposing the MacDonald's
and the Packard-Platt shopping
center while on the Planning Com-
mission. She has never served on
the Planning Commission.
On the basis of a single disputed
quote in The Ann Arbor News,
which Daily staffers constantly
criticize as biased, inept, e t c.
when it disagrees with Daily phil-
osophy, The Daily brands McGee
as inconsistent on rent control.
This, despite the appearance on
The Daily's own edit nage of a let-
ter from HRP activist David Ca-
hill (Daily 3/37), who oes nc
even support McGee. Cahill as-
serted unequivocally his belief that
McGee has been clearly and con-
sistently in support of the Rent
Control Amendment.
THE DAILY criticizes Democrat
Mary Richman for taking nearly
the identical stand on the ballot
proposals that it praises Democrat
Jamie Kenworthy for taking. ,goth
have supported both proosals and
both have done so with reserva-
tions about the practicality and le-
gal problems of the amendments,
as reported in The Daily's own ar-
ticles.
Events have shown the Demo-
crats' reservations justified. In the
first legal opinion rendered, At-
torney General Kelley questons
the legality of city-imposed con-
trol in general and several speci-
fics in the proposal. He questioned
the constitutionality of the s am e
clause cited by the Democrats,
that which makes it a crime for
city officials to enforce state law.
The Second Ward endorsement
is little more than a smear. Mary
Richman, it is suggested, h as giv-
en only lip service to reforms. Lip
service? Perhaps The Daily for-
gets Mary's participation in the
LSA Bookstore sit-in in :969, an ef-
fort which produced the Union Ce-
lar and which The Daily has al-

ways enthusiastically supported.
Mary put herself on the line, was
arrested and convicted, but was
cleared on appeal.
MARY HAS BEEN active in tie
peace movement as early as 1964.
She campaigned for McCarthy and
McGovern, worked in the Environ-
'mental Law Society and worked
with the Ann Arbor Committee to
Impeach Nixon. There is nothing
"sketchy about Mary's political
history.
According to The Daily, K"za-
chenko offers concrete proposals
while Richman offers empty rhe-
toric, particularly in the are, of
city finances. Richman has re-
peatedly stated her support .cr
graduated income taxes, but points
out they are barred by the State
Constitution. She proposes the only
feasible alternative: the 1 per
cent flat rate city in-omeax,
which would net the city over $1
million a year in additional re-
venue and replace part if the re-
gressive property tax. Kozachen
ko's answer solution to the city's
$1.2 million deficit is to cut the
police chief's $27,000 salary,
IT'S POLITICALLY easy to
promise people what they want:
lower rents and more social serv-
ices, etc. It's politically hard, but
much more honest, to tell people
that, legally and practically. they

Corruption
To The Daily:
THE DAILY expose of Democrat
Coleen McGee was a fine piece of
muckraking by reporter J a c k
Krost.
It is encouraging to see t h a t
The Daily is willing to uncover po-
litical flip-flopping even when it
discredits so-called liberals like
Ms. McGee.
The lesson of Watergate has all
too often been misunderstood by
many people. It is notjust t h a t
Richard Nixon and his cronies are
corrupt politicians. Rather, it
seems that both Democrats and
Republicans have shared in t h e
same general approach to politics
which puts special interests be-
fore those of the people in general,
and which tries to avoid taking
hard stands on controversial issues
which pit the average person
against big business.
For example, it was revealed re-
cently that Democratic Congres-
sional candidates received even
more money from the milk indus-
try than did Nixon. And last week,
Common Cause, usually a k n e e -
jerk liberal support group, blast-
ed the Democrats in Congress for
dragging their feet on election re-
form.
DOES ANYONE think that the
likes of "Scoop" Jackson, Hubert
Humphrey, Ted Kennedy, Richard
Daley, or John Stennis are any
more honest than Nixon?
Some people may cling to the
hope that the local Democratic
Party is better than the national
party. Coleen McGee's multiple
stands on rent control however,
should show them otherwise. Also,
not only does the locallDemocratic
Party refuse to address the is-
sue of rent control and the $ fine,
but its candidates (not just Mc-
Gee) change their position depend-
ing on the audience. I hope t h a t
Ann Arbor voters will show Mon-
day that they reject these tac-
tics.
-A First Ward resident
March 26
Colburn
To The Daily:
I PROTEST your biased and il-
logical "news" story entitled "Col-
burn changes stance" (3-21-74).
Your reporter, Mr. Whiting, i-
logically contends that GOP cao-
didate Colburn has contradicted
himself because he had said, on
the one hand, "I feel Individual
rights should be protected," and
on the other, "Council must con-
trol individual property owners'
rights." The statemens would be
in contradiction only i property
owners were not individuals - but
that just isn't so!
Moreover, even if you contend
that Colburn meant that the rights
of both owners and renters should
be protected, where's the contra-
diction? Both groups do have
rights, and rights should always
be protected. And note that Cl-
burn said Council should "con-
trol," i.e. limit, i.e. dfine and
regulate (not ignore or violate)
owners' rights.
-Robert Edgeworth
Rackham
GEO
To The Daily:
A FEW comments are in order
about. the mildly hostile and de-
finitely off-base letter to the edi-
tor from Mr. Eric Hansen and
others in the Department of Micro-
biology. The most recent date to
which the public emergence of
GEO (then OTF) can reasonably
be ascribed is November 8, 1973,
nearly s months ago. On this date
the mass meeting (with attend-'
ance estimated at 450) mandated
the organization to investigate, and
if indicated, pursue the route of

unionization of graduate assist-
ants. Between that time anad the
mass meeting and strike vote held
on February 18 of this year, an
'intensive organizing effort was
conducted, accompanied by a great
deal of leaflet publicity and Daily
reporting, as well as coverage in
the University Record and t h e
Ann Arbor News. GEO's regnest
early in 1974 for a comprehensive
list of graduate assistants w a s
denied by the administration, GEO
wanted the list expressly for the
purpose of insuring participation
in the organization by assistants
in all University programs. It was
clearly in the interest of the Uni-
versity to, keep GEO ignorant of
the existence and location of as-
sistants in the less accessible de-
partments, especially those tucked
away in the medical center and
the north campus.
THE OMISSION of any depart-
ment in the organizing thrust is
certainly seriously lamentable but
in view of the enormity of the
task of organizing 2185 as3 stants
and working and studying at the
same time, it is unfair to hold
culpable those who devoted so
much time and energy to the ef-
fort, especially when a single tele-
phone call by one of the ignored
parties would suffice to establish
contact with GEO. At a time when
the unity of graduate assistants is
so crucially at stake, it is re-

KEN FINK .. .. . . .......... .
STUART HOLLANDER ........,
KAREN KASMAUSKI........
DAVID MARGOLICK ......
ALLISON RUTTAN........
JOHN UPTON .....,.,....... .

Staff Photographer
Staff Photographer
Staff Photographer
Staff Photographer
Staff Photographer
Staff Photographer

4

I

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan