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


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.

October 30, 1976 - Image 4

Resource type:
Michigan Daily, 1976-10-30

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

Eighty-Seven Years of Editorial Freedom
420 Maynard St , Ann Arbor, MI 48109

Pulling the


Saturday, October 30, 1976

News Phone: 764-0552

Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan

Dietrich ads
To The Daily:
TO JOHN DIETRICH and all those who
paid for his political advertisement in
Tuesday's Daily:
Your 'broad-minded' puns are not funny
-they are insipid. If we were you,- we
wouldn't be so cock-sure.'
To The Daily and those of you who found
the ad funny: for people who espouse all
those things that good liberals espouse, you
certainly blew it this time. In an attempt to
represent (and in good faith, we presume)
all the candidates by printing their ads,
you've managed not only to support mud-
slinging but, to quote that old familiar
line; keep women down by objectifying us.
Perhaps YOU should be LESS 'broad-
Jane Rosenthal-
Alexandra Beckett
Ellen Sapper
Arlene 'rank
Gina Amalfitano
Vicki Bohm
October 26
To The Daily:
THE REPUBLICAN candidate for the
State Legislature had an ad in today's
Daily which I find totally offensive. To
imply that the Democrats are the party
of,"booze, broads, and excursions" is ir-
responsible politics; to publish such ads is
irresponsible journalism.
Nearly a century ago the Republicans
tried to label the Democrats as the party
of "rum, Romanism, and rebellion"; the ef-
fort blew ip in their faces. Let's hope that
history repeats itself.
E. L. McMahon
Electrical and Computer
October 26
Editor's Response:
To the misinformed persons who wrot
the above letters: The Daily staff makes
no editorial judgment on political ads, or
any other advertising it chooses to print.
To Jane Rosenthal, et al: We register a
vigorous objection to your assertions that
we have, in the process of running the
ads, supported mudslinging and 'keeping
women down."
To E. L. McMahon: It wasn't irrespon-
sible journalism to print the ads; In fact,
it was quite useful and responsible. Ob-
viously, many voters in the University
community, after having seen the ads,
found them to bertasteless. Like you, hope-
fully, they have decided they don't want
a person of Mr. Dietrich's demeanor rep-
resenting them in Lansing!
Rob Meachum
Editorial Director
Dullard endorsement
To The Daily:
I -FEEL AS A student your recent en-
dorsement of Bullard is incredible. One of
the big problems facing students is the
lack of jobs. A few years ago we could
very liberal on this campus and not worry
about getting a job. Today it is different,
today we are in need of jobs. Your overly
liberal views and those of Bullard seems to
overlook what happens to us once we
leave college. These liberal views are based
on our present position as students not
our future one as wage earners and par-
ents. How are we to exist if we can't find
work. Dietrich position is to work with the
representatives not against them to create
jobs with businesses. Not just big busi-
nesses but small businesses, those which
make up this city and which this city needs
desperate help in. Bullard has done noth-
ing for them even though he represents
them in the State House of Representa-
tives, but Dietrich wants to help the city.
Dietrich believes in making Education a
priority because he will be representing
the students. He also has a sense of con-

trolling expenses and keening the state
fiscal sound, something Bullard doesn't
consider and liberals tend to ignore by
spending. Just remember the Environment
and Rights are important to us but what
wll w e do without a job when we leave
one final point, I woold rather vote for
?A}¢' kvm he will finish his term
than Bnllard who has serious intentions
of running for State Senate in the very
rear future and leave his present office
Independent Students for
October 29
To The Daily:
WE FEEL IT IS time to respond to the
many false accusations, which have been

Delhey has successfully tried many felony
cases, his apponent has never tried a capi-
tal case, much less any case in Washte-
now County. How can this brevity of ex-
perience make his opponent equipped to
deal with the present day challenges of
the criminal justice system?
William Delhey's opponent has charged
him with complacency, stating that he is
not innovative, concerning new programs.
This is simply not true. Mr. Delhey was
instrumental in implementing the Consum-
er Action Center, the Anti-Rape program
and the Law Internship program. His op-
ponent claims that if elected, he will es-
tablish many new projects. However, he
has never specified what they would be,
or how they would function.
With over 5,000 cases, it is unfortunate
that Mr.tDelhey's opponent continues to
use poetic license and distorts the facts,
concerning those few he feels were mis-
It should be noted that William F. Delhey
has served the office extremely well and
has an outstanding record.

election has become a con-
fused crescendo of manipula-
tively sentimental television
commercials and absurd claims
by candidates of permanent
prosperity if put in office and
permanent peril to the Republic
if not. Yet those few Americans
supposedly responsible for run-
ning the nation's cities look at
this election with an informed
interest of what the federal gov-
ernment can do to help or har-
ass them with their job.
What follows is one small-
time, small towh politician's
prejudiced perspective on what
the election could mean to Ann
Arbor. It is an attempt to ap-
ply the debate over federal
housing, employment, and so-
cial programs to the particular
situation of our town.
A city of over 100,000 people,
Ann Arbor has a General Fund
budget of $14 million, with about
half going for fire and police.
The city gets about $5 million
in local property taxes, $15 mil-
lion general revenue sharing,
$2.5 million from the state and
$500,000 from the local's favor-
ite sin, parking tickets.

Ten years ago the city hits its
tax limit set in the charter and
so there is little room for any-
thing but providing for the ba-
sic services of public safety,
picking up the garbage, inspect-
ing buildings every three years
or so, and maintaining the
parks. With inflation, union
settlements, and a decline in
real revenues, the city now has
about 15 per cent fewer em-
ployes than four years ago try-
ing to provide services to 10
per cent more people.
During the Kennedy - John-
son years a lot of low to mod-
erate priced housing was built
in Ann Arbor for poor people,
and students. The senior citizen
project of Miller Manor was
put up by West Park, over 1,300
units were built in three hous-
ing co-operatives in Southeast
Ann Arbor and the HUD titles
set up that led to places like
Arrowwood Trail. The result
was a growth in the city's pop-
ulation and diversity.
During the 1970's housing con-
struction contracted rapidly, on-
ly two developments financed
by HUD have gone up in four
vears here and the documented
shortage of housing for low and

ever fo
moderate income people in Ann
Arbor has increased as fast as
your rents.
Of - course unemployment
worsened. In 1975 whe nthe city
and county were in a consor-
tium to administer CETA funds
we were receiving $6 million a
year and creating jobs at less
than $10,000 a piece for fewer
that 3 ptr cent of the unem-
ployed in Washtenaw County. To
sit on those boards to decide
who gets the job is to allocate
Now the city is a prime spon-
sor with about $3 million that
gives training of a subsidized
job to less than 700 people. This
is less than one in ten of the
acknowledged local unemnploy-
ment. Since there could be no
increased Congressional appro-
priation after Congress overrode
Ford's veto, we will not have
money next year at his spend-
ing level to creat more than a
handful of new jobs while we
try to keep employed current
CETA worker shoring up the
city's operations or working in
local non-profit community ag-
encies. The phone calls to me
asking for a job get a little

r city
And then there are such un-
met and mundane local needs
at $20 million necessary to re-
pair our streets, $30 million to
expand our sewage treatment
plan so we stop killing off the'
Huron River, and $10 million
needed for flood prevention pro-
jects. These are necessary mu-
nicipal projects not provided for
in our $15 million General Fund
budget that just tries to keep
the slow machinery of city gov-
ernment picking up the trash
and responding to a non-
emergency police calls in less
than an hour.
Aside from fewer federal dol-
lars, the way that federal ag-
encies like HUD take forever
to repair and resell vacant
homes in my district would
make a Kafka jealous or a Con-
fucius mad.
You wonder, after a day at
City Hall, that if it is nearly
impossible to provide decent
services to our relatively af-
fluent city with its expanding
tax base without bankrupting
the citizens with higher proper-
ty taxes, how does one try to
run a place like Detroit where
unemployment in some areas is
40 per cent, where they layoff
police by the hundreds, and
they can't afford gchool cross-
ing guards?

It's true that that programs
and spending levels proposed by
the Democrats in Congress will
not finally solve our housing,
employment, and human serv-
ice problems but they have at
least shown the country that
they know what the real needs
of our cities are and that they
are willing to redirect priori-
ties to begin at least to manage
our domestic problems. Ford
and Esch have shown no such
So on Tuesday I'm pulling the
big lever for Carter, Riegle, and
Pierce. My vote has nothing to
do with whether I like Jimmy's
smile, or where Jerry once
nlayed football, or where Don
Riegle once spent the night, or
even because being in city gov-
ernment for three years makes
me feel less twice-born than
twice-dead. It is this small-town
politician's statements of hope
about which people are going
to begin to meet the real needs
of this country's communities.
Jamie Kenworthy, 28, was a
fairly happy and' promising
University graduate student in
Anmerican Culture until his
election to City Council i
1974. Ie is a Fourth Ward

Yes on C means higher tuition

Greg Lane
Marjorie Lynn Pope
October 26


To The Daily:
only way to describe the media blitz cam-1
paign now being waged by corporate op-
ponents of Proposal "A." The "Big Lie"
that returnables cost more than throw-
aways is simply outrageous. The fact is
that returnables cost less.
When I compared prices at Meijer's in
Ann Arbor, I found that a 10-oz. portion
of Coca-Cola costs 21 cents in throwaway
cans, 16 cents in throwaway bottles, and
only 13 cents in returnable bottles. Clear-
ly returnables cost less than throwaways.
This corporate "Big Lie" campaign is
ll the more shocking in view of testimony
U.r the Presient of Coca-Cola before the
U.S. Senate Judiciary Committee. At that
hearing, the President of Coca-Cola, J.
Lucien Smith, said:
"Returnable bottles offer the best value
to the consumer and returnable bottles
provide the most economically sound meth-
od of distributing soft drinks .. .
Coke sold in food stores in non-return-
able packages is priced ...thigher than
toca-Cola in returnable bottles. The dif-
ference lies essentially in the different costs
of the packaging. The cost of returnables
is spread over many uses; thecost of the
non-returnable package is absorbed in one
IN OREGON, where a ban o non-re-
t'irnables has been in effect since 1971,
the average bottle is used more than 10
times, resulting in a great raw material
savings. In addition, studies by the Fed-
eral E.P.A. and Michigan Public Service
Commission show that requiring returnables
will result in significant energy savings.
Other studies (by Dr. Myron Ross of West-
ern Michigan University) indicate that up
to 9,165 new jobs would be created and
that Michigan consumers could save $66
million if a throwaway ban were enacted
Judging from polls taken prior to the
big-spending, "Big Lie" media blitz cam-
paign, Michigan citizens were more than
ready to ban non-returnables. The Dade
County, Florida experience, however, shows
'what a last minute media blitz designed
to mislead the public can do. In Florida,
opponents of a similar ban outspent sup-
porters 10 to 1, and the measure was de-
feated although early polls showed over-
whelming public support for a ban on non-
returnables. It just goes to show that votes
:an be bought by big-spending campaigns
designed to mislead and reverse public
opinion. I hope Michigan citizens will not
be fooled by this corporate "Big Lie" cap.
Perry Bullard
State Representative
53rd District
michigamu a
To The Daily:
IN ITS OCTOBER 27th article on the
racial discrimination complaint filed
against the University for its support of
Michigamua, The Daily incorrectly identi-
fied the Native American Solidarity Com-
mittee (NASC) as a Native American or-
ganization. Most NASC workers are non-
native people. NASC is attempting to edu-
cate people in non-native communities con-
cerning Native American struggles for sov-
ereignty, self-determination, and independ-
ence. We are attempting to confront the
racism directed towards Native Americans
by non-native people. The local NASC chap-
ter - there are 27 other chapters around
the country - was formed in 1975 by mem-
bers of the Ann Arbor Wounded Knee Sup-

If you care about how much it costs you and,
or your parents for you to attend the Univer-
sity of Michigan, then you should be very in-
terested in what you are about to read.
The Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) voted
Tuesday night to oppose Proposal C, which will
appear on the election ballot this coming Tues-
day. Proposal C, if passed, will put an expendi-
ture limit of 8.3 per cent of the total state
personal income level on the Michigan Legis-
lature. Yes, that is confusing. As I write this
I still don't really know how best to explain
exactly what the proposal would do. Trying to
reduce the discussion to something I can. under-
stand, what the proposal would do would be
to tell the state that it can only spend 8.3
per cent of what all the citizens of Michigan
together make in a year.. It also stipulates that
the State Legislature cannot cut the percentage
of its budget used to support any local program
such as schools, transportation, etc., and .that
local governments cannot raise property taxes
to cover possible funding deficiencies without
a vote of its citizens.
What does this all mean? It means that if
the total ┬░personal income of all the citizens of
Michigan is $ billion dollars, then the State
Legislature can spend only $83 million dollars
on all of its programs. The expenditures of the
State Legislature would be directly linked to the
income of the citizens of Michigan. If the in-
come of the citizens of the state went down,
so would the amount of money the State Legis-
lature could 'spend.
But wait a minute. Didn't I say that the
proposal states that the state cannot cut its
percentage of funding to local units? Yes, but
look closely. I said percentage of the state budg-
et. That means that it 4 per cent of the state
budget is currently going to the Ann Arbor
School District, then it will remain 4 per cent.
The catch is that should the total citizen in-
come of the state go down, then the amount
of money going to each unit will also decrease.
4 per cent of $83 million dollars is more than
4 per cent of $73 million dollars. The state gives
the same percentage of money, but it doesn't
add up to the same in dollars and cents.
Most of the money in the state budget now
goes for human services and education. Sup-
pose the income of Michigan drops, reducing
the amount of money the state can offer in the
support of these programs.. How will the cuts
work? The state cannot cut much out of its
human services budget, because most of its
money expended there is matched by federal
funds. For every dollar the state cuts from
human services the federal government cuts
another dollar in matching funds.
Education then *ecomes the target. There are
Old econg on
By JON PANSIUS leading econonr

tvo kinds of education, the traditional Kinder-
garten through twelfth grade education and high-
er education. Let's suppose the state cuts the
funds to education (without cutting the actual
percentage of the state budget allocated to edu-
cation. Remem~er the proposal forbids that.) The
K-12 schools can either eat the deficit, or they
can go to the local taxpayers, as they have
always done, and ask for money to keep their
program, at the same level. Where can higher
education go to make up for getting cut short?
There's really only one answer. They have to
raise- tuition. Perry Bullard states that if Pro-
posal C passes,. tuition could go up from 18
per cent-36 per cent the first year!! We can-
not afford to bear the increase, especially the
way tuition has climbed in the past five years.
It is unfair to expect us to. But that's exactly
what Proposal C would require!
Another argument that should be mentioned
with regard to Proposal C: creativity is a great
thing. It is one of the fonndation stones of the
University of Michigan. Creativity, like every-
thing else, costs money. Should Proposal C pass,
it would be safe to say that the money avail-
able to fund creative and meaningful new pro-
1grams wouldbecome non-existent. I'd sure hate
to see the University unable to keep uip with edu-
cational innovation for lack of money.
I haven't seen many times when either SA
or SGC have been in agreement with the admin-
istration on anything. Proposal C is an excep-
tion. In an unprecedented move, the Board of
Regents publicly voted to oppose Proposal C.
President Fleming is becoming one of the more
vocal public opponents of the measure. The
League of Women Voters, with a history of non-
endorsement, chose to break tradition to oppose
the proposal. Governor Milliken and leading Dem-
ocrats in the State House and Senate have given
joint news conferences to announce their dissat-
isfaction with the bill. Think about it. Michigan
Education Association, the American Association
of University Professors, the American Associa-
tion of University Wives, the UAW; and the
AFL/CIO have all gone on record as opposing
this bill. The Michigan Chamber of Commerce
and the Michigan Real Estate Lobby support
it. Which side do you think is out to protect
your interest?
You cannot afford to let this proposal pass,
unless you are willing to watch your tuition soar
and your parent's property tax increase!! MSA
says it can't stand by and watch a bad bill in-
crease the burden on students. We hope you
agree and believe that it is vital to your own
interests to vote "no" on Proposal C. That is
of course unless you are willing to pay the cost.

WAS SUPPOSED to assist in the compilation of The
Daily's endorsement of Jimmy Carter, Wednesday night.
After mulling over all possible reasons why I could con-
ceivably endorse the man without it being a lesser of, two
evils type endorsement, I came to the conclusion that I
couldn't do it. And I reached this conclusion even though
during the week, I had decided to vote for Jimmy Carter.
I copped a plea; at 2:30 in the morning I called the
Editorial Director and told him that I was too exhausted to
come over and write. It was true, but I can't help wondering
whether or not I would have been as tired and unwilling to
contribute if I wasn't so totally turned off by the candidates.
I attributed it further to my profound disappointment that
in this, my first chance to have some input into the political
process, my initial excitement had evolved into total apathy
and disdain towards the election.
I WAS WALKING through the Diag yesterday morning
with a friend, fresh from a dismal failure in one of two mid-
terms, when a man attempted to shove a Workers Vanguard
into my hand and said, "Don't vote, because both of the
major candidates are the same, for the rich."
My friend and I started discussing the idea of non-
voting as a form of political expression. I brought up that
this election could produce the lowest percentage of voter
turnout in recent history. My friend said that it was because
it was a no-issue campaign, and that nobody really cared.
I countered with the argument that "since the debates
had been on television and millions of people who never had
previously taken the time to be informed, had the candidates
and the issues brought right into their homes-coupled with
a very strong and unified campaign by organized labor to
educate the workers and to encourage them to turnout-it
should be a very high voter-turnout election."
SHE REPLIED THAT the debates just brought to light
the non-appeal of the candidates and the lack of a clearcut
difference between them on the issues.
I said that I had found through viewing the debates that
I could differentiate betw'een the candidates' positions on
many of the issues, and that I was sure that everyone was
able to discern the same things that I did.
She answered, "We as college students were more aware
than most people and could see the distinctions, but that
most people can't, and as a result, don't care and won't
I became angry and said that her claim smacked of
intellectual snobbery, and that she was underestimating the
intellect and political efficacy of the American people.
SHE HUFFED AND PUFFED and said it was not in-
tellectual snobbery, that I was too idealistic and that how else
could I explain the projected low voter turnout. At this point
we reached the dorm and parted ways.
A little while later, I began to think about my own
choices for the election, and the principle of non-voting as a
form of political expression.
And I started thinking about my abstention from helping
write the Carter endorsement, in light of the fact that I had
decided to vote for Carter as "the lesser of two evils"
candidate after having previously planned to vote for Ford
for exactly the same reasons.
I REALIZED THAT whichever candidate I finally de-
cided to vote for, it would be a negative endorsement of him.
I would be voting for one man because I would be betting
that the next 4 years would be less distasteful with him in
office than with the other.
And I am having a difficult time reconciling myself to
this mode of selecting a President. When I have brought up
this dilemma to my friends, they've said to vote for one of
the third party candidates. But this year there is no third
party candidate that appeals to me strongly. If there was a
candidate whom I identified with, then I would happily give
him my vote and my support, even though he or she most
likely wouldn't have much chance of winning the election.
Under the present circumstaices, voting for a third party
would be a waste of a vote.
AND THUS, my thoughts strayed back to non-voting as a
viable and self-fulfilling alternative. If my friend was right
that the low voter turnout that is predicted for this election
can be attributed to people not caring, then if I decided not
to vote, wouldn't I be helping to propogate what is becoming
an epidemic of apathy? Or are people refraining from going
to the polls because they recognize along with me that they
would be voting to keep one man out of office and not in
support of the other man that they voted for? And in which
case, would our non-vote be counted and recognized as the
protest it was intended to be?
Will the winner of the election notice the low turnout


im oTf

Cal.in Iuker
dent Assembly.

is President of the Michigan Stn-

rnic " e--4sistm

iic indicators are

referendum choice between
naive bunglers, hokey dema-
gogues, and omniscient ideal-
ists - also known as the Presi-
dential election-the most para-
mount issue has been the na-
tion's economy, which has even
been occasionally mentioned be-
tween the prolonged bouts of
m u t u a 1 mudslinging. Unlike
Ford's campaign fund manage-
ment and Jimmy's sex life,
however, jobs and inflation are
something that should be seri-
ously talked about. Ever since
its discovery, discretionary eco-
nomic policy has become an
Important Issue, to be inflated
into pigskin and punted about
for the merriment of the vari-
ous interests and, or rare oc-
casion, discussed rationally.
Fortunately, the establishment
of the Council of Economic Ad-
visors and the Congressional
Budget Office has raised the
rationality ratio to a barely ade-
quiate fraction.
Small talk aside, the econom-
ic prospects of the campaign
are dim.
On one side, we have the
ohoice of President Ford, who

beginning to point downward.
This hardly seems like a strong
In Ford's favor, there is the
enormity of the task involved.
At the trough of the recession
which he essentially inherited,
unemployment was at a nominal
high of 8.9 per cent, with many
more no longer seeking em-
ployment. Now, after discount-
ing for the unexpected surge of
seasonal workers (mostly school
employees) drawing unemploy-
ment compensation, the rate has
inched down to a little over
seven per cent. Inflation, once
at an annual rate of twelve per
cent, now is down to around
five per cent. Overall, however,
his performance has been medi-
ocre. His proposal to lower in-
come taxes is overdue, and its
linkage to spending decreases
would cancel out much of its
beneficial effects.
ON THE OTHER side, we
have the Georgia gratuiter,
Jlimmy Carter, who has been
wanting to jiggle with taxesband
spending for almost three years.
He has promised us m-ore jobs;
he has also promised less in-
flation. Unfortunately, he has

le has also recalled the Ken-
nedy-Johnson ghost of voluntary
wage-price guidelines to hold
the lid on prices. He seems to
forget that lid will blow off un-
less the heat underneath the pot
gets turned down.
Somewhere out in space we
have McCarthy. His most not-
able proposal has been the
shortening of the work week or
work year. Enjoyable as long
weekends and vacations are,
this scheme has little chance of
success. If we do legislate a
four-day work week, this would
cause a cool 20 per cent per
hour wage increase if weekly
wages were held constant or.
a 20 per cent per week wage
decrease if per hour wages were
held constant. With the former,
we get inflation; with the lat-
ter, we get more overtime,
moonlighting, and wage in-
crease demands.
NONE OF THE major can-
didates have yet to come up
with anything original. This is
sad, since there have been
some important structural
c(hanges in the past few years.
Industrial expansion is more
costly now with increased re-
u(irw-,ents and demands for

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan