editors: martin porter tony schwartz design editor: rolfe tessem Sunday mogazine contributing editors: laura berman howie brick chris parks Number 21 Page Three April 7, 1974 FEATURES Wechsler, DeGrieck: How it was on By MARTIN PORTER T WAS A victory that surprised the winnersthemselves - a sudden upset which placed two radical third party candidates on the Ann Arbor city council. The political' scene back in April 1972 seemed frenetic and charged with enthusiasm. A new faith in the electoral process had developed and it .led Human Rights Party candi- dates Nancy Wechsler and Jerry De Grieck to unexpected victories in Ann Arbor's first and second wards. Two years later the question of whether or not they have made an appreciable impact on life and poli- tics in Ann Arbor is moot. The last half of their term in office was spent all but gagged and manacled by a Republican majority,mand in last week's city election HRP retained only one of their two seats. Nonetheless, De Grieck and Wechsler appear more optimistic today than when they were first elected. "I think I have actually had a lot more influence than I initially ex- pected," says De Grieck as he draws on a Kool. "At the time I really didn't have much hope. Today I know that third party politics can work." Nancy Wechsler echoes this feel- ing. "When I first ran for office I saw electoral politics as only a tool that the left could use. Now I see it as the key to building a successful left wing movement." Now both De Grieck and Wechsler are calm and secure while voicing their thoughts. Back in the early days of their term they appeared confus- ed and apprehensive. De Grieck says this was due to his inexperience, but Wechsler admits to feeling added pressures. "At the time I felt an in- credible burden. I felt that I had to prove more than Jerry. I had to prove myself as a woman-that a woman could be aggressive." During their first year in office, no party had a majority on council. When De Grieck and Wechsler teamed up with Democratic council- persons the control shifted into their hands. This experience, however, has not changed their instinctive distrust "Harris and I were constantly fighting," says Wechsler. "But at least the arguments were always political. Since the Republicans got into office the arguments have become personally directed. It has become even worse since Jerry and I 'came out'." of Democrats. "One common thing that people say about our term in office was that we forced the Democrats to take a left stand . . . this may be true but I have learned that Democrats are never to be trusted. There is basically little difference between them and the Republicans," says Wechsler. They do sight major differences between Mayor Jim Stephenson and ex-Mayor Robert Harris, though. "Politics with Harris was exciting and a challenge," says De Grieck, "I had thought at first that Stephenson would at least supply some sort of in- tellectual opposition. But I soon found, out that he wasn't bright at all." Wechsler is vehement when she adds, "Harris and I were constantly fighting but at least the arguments were always political. Since the Re- publicans got into office the argu- ments have become personally direct- ed. It has become even worse since Jerry and I 'came out'." Both Wechsler and De Grieck con- sider last August's public announce- ment that they were homosexual as a turning point in their relations with the Republican city council. DE GRIECK indignantly claims, "The fact that there were two Council radical city councilpersons was hard enough for them to take. But the fact that there were two radical gay city councilpersons was unbearable. Ste- phenson tried to label HRP as the gay party. Throughout the last weeks of the election he tried to use the com- munity's homophobia against our party." Neither seem concerned that their 'coming out' might have been politic- ally inopportune. "If we ever lost an election because of if I still wouldn't regret my decision," Wechsler says. "If we were looking at it strictly in terms of votes, obviously we wouldn't have done it." The complaint that their closeness to the gay movement has directed their attention away from other ra- dical issues in the community is un- warranted, they claim. Wechsler expresses surprise at the accusation. "We were always active in the gay movement. Even before we 'came out' we worked for gay rights. Back then nobody made this claim. I consider gay rights only one of the many causes that I have to fight for." De Grieck sees this accusation as another Republican ploy to divide the radical community. "I have seen this throughout the last year. Stephenson has found that pitting us in opposi- tion to the black movement and the women's movement he can sap our strengths and force us to fight among ourselves." A two year tally lists the $5 mari- juana ordinance, revenue sharing and the human rights ordinance as their major victories on council. Aided by De Grieck's backroom bargaining the city budget was re- apportioned to include greater em- phasis on social services. Among the groups receiving more money were: Drug Help, Ozone House, Community Center, child care, Women's Crisis Center, Free Clinic. The Human Rights Ordinance was written and supported by both Wechsler and De Grieck. Its passage marked the first time equality for minorities, includ- ing homosexuals, was required by law rather than supported by resolu- tion. Jerry DeGrieck being sworn into office in 1972 In addition, they claim that they have broken down the stodgy formal- ity of city council meetings and have at times used it as a forum for such larger issues as impeachment and the coup d'etat in Chile. "We've tried to open up city coun- cil to the community. If that was all we had accomplished during the two years, I would be satisfied," says De Grieck. LIFE AS A council person has had its drawbacks both Wechsler and De Grieck say, and at times became personally straining. "It became unbearable constantly talling politics. It got to a point where I didn't tell people that I was on council, because once they knew, they would only deal with me in that perspective." An additional strain which Wech- sler felt was the fact that her mother was very ill and died during the council term. "I was being torn in two ways. It was inevitable that my energy couldn't go fully into my work. At times I felt like I couldn't get out of the political mold and this was torture." As for the future neither De Grieck nor Wechsler has definate plans. De Grieck plans to travel out West. Wechsler hints that she will head East to live. Both claim that they will still be politically active but neither is interested in pursuing a public po- litical career in the near future. De Grieck feels that "too much of a public life has a tendency to make you warped and twisted. It was a great experience but the experience wouldn't grow if I had to be in office another term. Some people use poli- tics as a cop-out so that they don't have to deal with other problems with their life." Wechsler's reaction is similar, "Right now I want to take a rest. Its hard living under constant scrutiny and criticism. I thought for a while about running for public office again, but I want to look at life from a dif- ferent perspective for awhile." "I think that we broke some ground in Ann Arbor," De Grieck later adds, "But there is no reason why things shouldn't continue like they are. HRP shouldn't be dependent on any one individual because once that happens the whole thing becomes an ego trip - no different from Democratic and Republican party politics." "What you have to remember," Wechsler waxes philosophically, "is that HRP is more than a story of two people. Our turn is up but this doesn't mean that the story comes to an end. The story is just beginning." Martin Porter is outgoing editor of the Sunday Magazine. He will be pursuing his craft this summer in the sunny south, where he will be a reporter at Reg Mur- phy's Atlanta Journal. Amnesty question dominates fives of exiled war resi ters By SANDY HAUSMAN WHEN THE POW's began returning tHEthe U. S. from Vietnam, the subject of a possible amnesty for war resisters came alive. A few months later, it was nearly forgotten again, as the nation plunged into Watergate and a thousand energy-related prob- lems. This month, however, the amnesty question was back, prompted by three days of Congressional hearings in Washington. Thousands of war resist- ers and deserters dared to hope again for an amnesty. Some guess there are 15-20,000 draft dodgers and deserters in Can- ada, with an additional 5,000 over- seas. Still shakier estimates put the number of men underground in the United States at 200,000 with around half a million vets facing a tight job market with less than honorable dis- charges (often resulting from an anti-war act). Each of these groups might be in- cluded in an- amnesty, and some would benefit by it more than others. The Canadian exiles have probably had it easier than other groups of dodgers and dissenters, but even they would be glad to see a government move started toward reconciliation. Bruce Bolin left Michigan for Tor- onto in 1968. He and his wife, Janet, hnA imf o~rr~i $i~tAAfrn V1amo7nnb What is perhaps most disturbing about the question of amnesty for these people is not so much the fact that there is none, but rather the fact that the issue remains unsettled. "The possi- bility of going back to one's own country disrupts the exile's adjustment to life in a new country," according to one Toronto psychiatrist. job at the University of Toronto, and Janet was working for the city. Now, after a five-year wait, they've been granted Canadian citizenship, and recently they bought their first house. Things are good for the Bo- lins - they don't even think of mov- ing back to the United States. "We certainly were lonely when we first came up here," Bruce admits. "But that would have happened any- way, since all our college friends dis- persed. Now that we've settled in, we really like it here. I think, in a lot of ways, Canada has a better future than the States." But even with the satisfaction they express over life in Toronto, the Bo- lins would like to see an amnesty. As young. He'd like to be able to come and stay with us there during the summers." But, for the junior Bolins, a con- ditional amnesty - requiring years or months of public service - would not be good enough. Bruce argues that serving a term in order to come back for visits would be like admit- ting a kind of guilt for what he and other draft dodgers did. Women wouldn't have to do public service, men who got physical deferr- ments or were deferred for the min- istry would not have to chip-in. Why, he argues, should those who resisted the war differently have to give up jobs and homes to do conditional ser-. vice in the U.S.? Program or something like that and got sources to talk to. And the Anti- Draft Program is only in touch with people who are having problems. It's harder to find people like us, but I suspect our case is pretty typical of those who came over the border," he says. FOR CHARLEY Stimac of Cadillac, Michigan, and his wife, Jenny of Detroit, coming back would be more than a family reunion - it would mean the restoration of a family tra- dition. Charley, who has worked in fac- tories and gone to school since he was 15, wants to organize workers at a Ford plant in Detroit. "My grand- father was working with labor there in the 1920's and 30's; he was in on the initial struggles. My Dad worked at Ford too," he says. But for the time being, he and Jen- ny are doing political work in Can- ada. Like Bruce and Janet Bolin, they are content to stay in Toronto. No conditional amnesty will bring them back. Charley says he's been serving the public for years now, and feels that his political work is more valuable than any government-assigned activ- ities could be. In the same city, however, there .. _.. .; t ... i" yy,,