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