94C 34r1gan Da't
Eighty-two years of editorial freedom
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
Voting: Politics, pzzazz and precipitation
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.
SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 11, 1972
-.1
Harvey: A sore loser?
Doug Harvey's post election shake up
in the Sheriff's dept. confirms the judge-
ment of the overwhelming majority of
county voters who repudiated him in
Tuesday's election.
Harvey's actions appear to be political-
ly motivated. Wednesday morning he
fired clerk Carol Compton for allegedly
tearing Harvey bumperstickers off of car
fenders. Later that day he demoted two
of his officers, Lt. Thomas Dorrance and
Sgt. Richard Coppernoll, to jailguards,
reportedly for supporting undersheriff
Harold Owings' republican candidacy.
But Compton has denied the charge
that she destroyed any of Harvey's cam-
paign advertising, and Owings has point-
ed out that Dorrance never did any cam-
paign work for him. Harvey's actions cer-
tainly could be called politically motivat-
ed, but Fred Postill, of all people -- Har-
vey's arch enemy and winner in Tues-
day's election - has a more understand-
ing appraisal. "I think Harvey came into
the office Wednesday morning in a very
unstable frame of mind," Postill says, "He
just blew up at the first people he saw."
Harvey's state of mind is indeed under-
standable. Although Harvey was unex-
pected to run strongly among the coun-
ty's conservative voters, his own subor-
dinates, undersheriff Owings, pulled,
three thousand more votes than he. The
Postill victory, which was made possible
by the division of the conservative vote
between Harvey and Owings, must have
been even more galling.
Defeated both by his number two man
and his arch enemy, Doug Harvey is un-
derstandably upset. However, the form in
which he chose to express his distress, a
spur of the moment lame duck exercise in
administrative headchopping directed at
helpless subordinates who couldn't fight
back - is exactly the kind of impulsive,
thoughtless behavior which cost him his
office.
Doug Harvey his his virtues. He is
blunt, outspoken, and steady in his opin-
ions of right and wrong. Unfortunately,
he appears too irresponsible and too im-
mature to hold an important public of-
fice. County voters, both liberal and con-
servative, delivered their judgement on
Doug Harvey Tuesday, and it is only to
be hoped that the man will learn his
lesson.
-DAVID STOLL
By JIM O'BRIEN
ELECTION DAY, 1972, in beau-
tiful Ann Arbor.
The last memory to fade when I
recall the happy, carefree years
of college will certainly be that
walk to the polling place, my ex-
cited heart beating fast against
my ribcage, and the rain even
faster against my sodden and
hung-over head.
My corduroy winter coat, a crisp
five pounds in dry weather, was
easily 30 by the time I reached the
impressive bastion of Democracy
wherein the might of the Ameri-
can public works to throw the old
rascals out and ring in the new.
And what a bastion it was.
If they had had cinder blocks in
Lincoln's day the Mary Street poll-
ing station would have taken its
rightful place beside suchmodern
masterpieces as the duplex and
the McDonald's Hamburger stand;
still, it is a poignant reminder of
the days when Tammany was in
flower.
There I stood, transfixed in my
fatuous meditations, behind 50
like-minded guardians of their
constitutional rights, and there I
might still be standing, had not one
of the guardians turned to me and
asked in a whiny voice: "How
long we gonna have to wait out
here anyways?"
As I searched my mind for a
polite, but witty _ way to express
my ignorance, the line lurched
forward until I was almost in the
doorway.
UNDER CLOSER SCRUTINY,
the building seemed disappointing-
ly small;perhaps 20 feet across
the front and 40 feet deep.
Consternation, as they say, turn-
ed to lucidation, when I reflected,
in my rapier-sharp fashion that
fewer people could fit into a small-
er building, thus the wait for an
empty voting booth would be short-
er. The line jerked again, and
from my new position at the door-
way I could see the single room of
the interior.
I remember reading somewhere
that the average human body oc-
A ortio,
my look of bewilderment. "He
means if your last name begins
with a letter between A and H,
you should stand in the first line,
from H to 0 you should stand in
the middle line-"
"And pizzazz people belong
here," I finished for him.
A quick mental adjustment, and
I was on my way to the Ho-ho line,
past the same angry faces, over
the same familiar feet.
Almost before I knew it, two
hours had passed, and I could see
the front of the line.
THINGS GET HAZY after that.
I think I remember the curtain of
the voting booth opening, as
though in a dream, in front of me.
"Are you gonna stand there
dreaming or vote?" The familiar
whiny voice rang in my ears.
Grasping the thick red handle
in both trembling hands, I closed
the curtain and stood alone in the
booth.
I can't explain what happened
next. My mind flooded with visions
of power, with wrongs, real and
imagined that others had done me,
and overpowering lust for revenge.
Without conscious effort, my
hand lifted the window, and the
pencil came out of my pocket.
I wrote myself in for county
drain commissioner.
Jim O'Brien is a Night. Editor
for The Daily, and received one
vote Tuesday for county drain
co m missioner.
cupies about 2 cubic feet of space,
and that the entire human race
could be placed in a box with sides
one- fourth of a mile long. But like
the Empire State Building, Alice
Cooper and the state of Ohio, I
never really believed it until I saw
it.
The room, to put it mildly, was
"occupee."
Undismayed, at least not dis-
mAyed enough to leave,wIhthrew
myself at a breach in what ap-
peared to be the fastest moving of
three lines inching toward a like
number of blue-curtained fitting
rooms.
Simultaneously I realized that:
a. I had made a mistake, b. it
would be difficult to correct it, c.
it was getting to be a worse mis-
take the longer I stayed in that
line.
AS OUR SMILING poll worker
put it, after I was already secure-
ly wedged between a steam pipe
and the rear corner of the room:
"Before you get into one of these
lines be sure to fill out an appli-
cation to vote and have it signed
at this table just inside the door."
Chuckling silently at the prank
fate had played on me, I churned
my way back against the current
of human flesh, gaining a new re-
spect for salmon, and the undis-
guised animosity of my fellow pa-
triots.
Once back at the table, I filled
out the form, and for good mea-
sure, turned it over and scrawled
a scathing indictment of democ-
racy, rain and smiling pollwork-
ers in dry clothes.
CLUTCHING MY E N F R A N-
CHISEMENTand an innocent by-
stander, I made my way back to
Daily Photo by DAVID MARGOLICK
the end of the closest line. Wrong
again.
"Are you all pizzazz people
here?' asked the ubiquitous smil-
ing election official. "If you're real-
ly an Ah-ha, you belong over in
the far corner, and you Ho-hos
should be in the middle line," he
added.
A standee, who had apparently
heard the speech before, noticed
i
HRP holding steady
THE HUMAN RIGHTS Party, contrary
to recent skepticism, is not ready to
call it quits. Losing the last election was
not a disaster for the party in that the
members of the party are still committed
to their goal of fundamental change in
the state of the nation. Thus, spring elec-
tions and non-electoral activities are now
the topics of discussion among its mem-
bers.
The reason for the decrease in support
for HRP's candidates was not its failure
to communicate to the electorate success-
fully. Indeed, voters now see the party as
it is-a democratic socialistic party, dedi-
cated to carrying out strong changes in
our society.
Unfortunately for HRP, too many
people still equate the terms "socialism"
and "change" with something unameri-
can, and furthermore, only recognize the
validity of two parties in an election.
The Human Rights Party works to
change the entire economic system. They
want a complete change not a modifica-
tion of the old system, like the two major
parties. They .refuse to modify their
stands. They want those people that
agree with them to support them.
They want to spread their ideas and say
what they believe. If people reject their
beliefs, fine, if they accept them, even
better.
IT IS LIKELY that the Democrats will
continue for a while to run for office
TO day's staff:
News: Gordon Atcheson, Pat Bauer, Jan
Benedetti, Robert Burakoff, Cindy Hill,
Judy Ruskin.
Editorial Page: Bill Heenan, Linda Rosen-
thal, Martin Stern.
Arts Page: Gloria Jane Smith.
Photo Technician: David Margolick.
the "young liberals" of their party .
like Perry Bullard, in student districts.
Their strategy being to demolish HRP's
chance of winning any elections. They
believe that the students will be fooled
into believing that there is no need for
a third party-that the Democratic Party
will cater to the needs of the students,
and that there is no need for a third
party.
Hopefully students won't be deceived
by this. The Democratic party will never
be able to give them any long-term power.
Sometimes on a local level the parties
have primaries and appear to be open to
change and influence. But at the state
and the national level the only way to
get somewhere is by having money and
backroom bargaining. That is why people
like Zolton Ferency and Jerry DeGriek
left the Democratic party. Also, after Mc-
Govern's overwhelming defeat, one can
be sure that the Democrats won't be
running anyone to the far left of their
party for a long time.
The Democratic party and the Republi-
can party' have no ideology. They are
just a coalition loosely formed in order to
win. They talk of specific issues, like
welfare, but never mention the root of
tie problem. They talk about reforming
the old system instead of instigating
fundamental change in the form of an
entirely new system.
That is the main difference between
the two major parties and the Human
Rights Party. The Human Rights Party
has firm convictions and is slowly but
surely working their way towards their
goal of radical change till it becomes
accomplished - whether they win elec-
tions or not.
reform defeat;
All's
left i s
By KATHY RICKE
NE OF THE saddest things about Tuesday's elec-
tion is that women in Michigan will still have to
fly out of state to terminate unwanted pregnancies
or pursue illegal and dangerous abortions.
The voters had a chance to change this on election
day by voting "yes" on proposal B, which would
have allowed abortion up to twenty weeks of preg-
nancy, in a hospital or clinic.
Instead the proposal was defeated by a two to
one margin.
I hope that anyone who voted to defeat this
reform will realize the consequences it will have,
and do something constructive to help the lives they
believe they're protecting.
This could include:
" Extensive and government supported day care
for everyone.
* Complete pre and post natal care on demand.
" Providing increased adoption for hard to place
children; such as those born with birth defects or
retardation, or children who are no longer "cute
little babies."
* Government supported psychiatric care for
both the unwanted children and the women who had
bi~tterness
to bear them.
In the meantime, even if all these unlikely re-
forms did occur, there hasbeen no provision for
emotionally unstable women. For some, even the
idea of childbirth is simply too traumatic. What
happens to them?
If she's lucky enough to have a little money she
can make a trip to New York and have an abortion
there. Inconvenient and scary, but better than the
second alternative - she can stick a pink carna-
tion on her lapel and be picked up by a local abor-
tionist.
Or she can do the job on herself with no antisep-
tics or pain killers, and more than likely end up
in the morgue.
AN UNFORTUNATE ASPECT is that the issue is
abstract for many of the bill's opponents. It's easy
to legislate morality for somebody else. What if the
problem of pregnancy was brought home? Chances
are, the outcome would have been very different.
It's too bad the decision was partly theirs.
Kathy Ricke is a staff writer for The Daily.
Landslide lesson:
Emb race the middle
By STEVE KOPPMAN
IT MUST NOW be clear to all of us, after the landslide defeat of
George McGovern nationally, the failure of all significant proposals
statewide, and the massive losses suffered by HRP locally, that the
American people are turning away from radicalism and far-out view-
points, and that from here on in, if young people are to be politically
effective, they must stick to the middle of the road, more or less.
A wise aphorism attributed to former President Eisenhower in
a Jules Feiffer cartoon, spoken during the Little Rock school integra-
tion crisis, would do us all well in making the student Left relevant to
the new world it faces. "I'm against the extremists on both sides,"
the wise old man said, "those who want to bomb the schools and those
who want to keep them open." Sage advice, that we would do well
to heed today, one way or the other.
A freshman reading Samuelson's Economics (a classic in modera-
tion which should probably be memorized by all of us before we again
engage in politics) recently pointed out to me the moral dilemma posed
therein between two theories of taxation-the 'sacrifice' theory, that
those who can afford to pay should, and the 'benefit' theory, that those
who benefit from a service should pay for it. Samuelson noted that our
system was a compromise', which would not please the enthusiasts of
either theory. The freshman, in his term paper, plans to advocate that
the benefit theory be wholeheartedly and universally applied. Those on
welfare, for instance, should pay for welfai'e. It is perspectives like
these that must, give or take, be heeded if we are to help educate and
at the same time remain relevant to the American people, so to speak.
We must apply this realism and tolerance to every aspect of our
political psyche, bar only some.
We must deplore both those who would give the poor one full meal
each day and those who would callously let them starve.
We MUST DENOUNCE, objectively, both those who criticize Presi-
dent Nixon and those who brashly claim his re-election necessarily rep-
resents the second coming of Christ.
We should allow abortion, but only if the fetus is already dead.
On Vietnam, we must oppose the extremists on both sides, those who
want to completely destroy that country, and those who do not.
We should continue to support graduated income taxes, but not
coerce anyone into paying them, in the higher ranges.
We must continue to allow radicals to organize, but not if they
gather in groups of more than two, or talk.
We must have clear guarantees against any wire-tapping or inva-
sions of privacy, unless they are used against anyone who is doing
anything.
We will support free health care, except for people who are really
sick and may not be able to pay back.
We may allow busing when everything else has failed first, except
for the purposes of integration or better education.
We must support government-guaranteed jobs for those who can-
not find other employment, but oppose those who would go overboard
and pay these people money.
We'should read both Time AND Newsweek.
Aboard, we must accept one moral principle above all-applying
one standard to all types of governments-supporting them all so long
as they occupy more than half of a capital city and do not immediately
threaten anything that belongs to anyone.
We should drop criminal penalties relating to marijuana, unless
users are found to have derived any pleasure from it.
We must evaluate capitalism and socialism in a clear, rational, ob-
jective light, applying only the criteria of which system better pro-
tects private property, gives full vent to man's innate need to destroy
others, and best permits any American to rise from an apple crate to a
mansion within one generation.
We should support Daylight Savings Time, but only in years divisible
by 986.
We should tax neither money made by money, nor people made by
people.
i
I
Letters to The Dailyv
BARBARA GLICKLIN
HRP not perfect
To The Daily:
IN LAST SPRING'S city coun-
cil election, the Human Rights
Party received overwhelming sup-
port largely because it was new,
unsullied, and its candidates were
young. That support apparently
was not based on understanding of,
nor sincere agreement with the
party's goals.
In Tuesday's election the other
local candidates were also young
and eager. The choice was more
clearly a question of supporting the
growth of a radical third party
movement or accepting the pres-
ent two parties.
I do not agree that HRP's cam-
paign was "too light on issues, too
heavy on rhetoric". There is a dif-
ference between rhetoric and ide-
ology. On many specific issues
self - styled Democrat "radicals"
sound exactly like the HRP plat-
form.
However, the difference is in the
underlying analysis of the cause
and solutions of these problems.
The question of whether our sys-
tem of private enterprise can be
gradually amended and human.
ized, or whether we must start
with a completely different pre-
mise (collectivization) is what di-
vides "radical" reformists from
radical socialists. Thus, it neces-
sarily follows that HRP candidates
stress party collectivism while
other party's candidates stress
their individuality.
Furthermore, I'm sure Mr.
Parks, as a journalist, recognizes
that almost all issues in political
ories and long term goals.
Mr. Parks is correct that con-
cepts such as collective decision
making and candidate discipline
have limited mass appeal. But they
must be stressed during a cam-
paign as well as between elec-
tions, if the HRP is to keep its
political base and direction.
There is no room in the Ameri-
can electorate nor long-term jus-
tification for a party of young,
idealistic Democrats who can win
elections. But there is a need for
a party committed to achieving
democratic socialism to this coun-
try.
Losing Tuesday's election was
disappointing but not destructive.
Winning some council seats next
spring would help expand the par-
ty, spread its ideas, and provide
more access at the decision - mak-
ing level, but if HRP must com-
promise or hide its politics to win,
there is no hope of consistency or
fundamental change after the elec-
tion.
HRP's extinction could come, not
simply from losing elections, but
because of a desire to win, over-
shadowing all other goals so much
that the party would begin to
mush and waver as desperately as
McGovern was forced to.
If, on the other hand, HRP sup-
porters manage to keep their ideo-
logy clear and continually strive
to retain an internally democratic
structure that reaches out to more
people and groups, it is conceiv-
able that this party or one simi-
lar to it, could spread across the
United States.
Daily that "she took down the
poster only to read it." If the
Daily's report is correct, Nancy
has to be disciplined by the party.
HRP's candidates ask to be
elected on the basis of HRP's poli-
tics. Furthermore HRP claims
that a vote for anyone of its candi-
dates is a vote for the party-
nothing more, nothing less - since
its elected office holders act only
as agents of the party. Given this
stance and given Nancy's action
and explanation of it, if the party
doesn't denounce her behavior a
vote for any one of HRP's candi-
dates is in part a vote for election
sabotage and for bullshit "expla-
nations".
I believe that the development
of a left radical political party is
essential at this point in our his-
tory. I hope HRP is that party
but I don't see that winning this
election is especially important to
HRP's development. On the other
hand, dishonest campaigning could
seriously damage that development
even if the party wins in the elec-
tion.
-Dan Halpern
Nov. 4
Nasty pictures
To The Daily:
ALTHOUGH THE election is now'
over and the fate of Proposal B
decided, we should not let Steve
Smith's letter (The Daily, Nov. 4)
go by.
Any education in his life must
have consisted of creative writing
and conscious efforts to compile
MMIIMWIR\\ 77 FA