"The Stephenson Smooth Shuffle" A l)OWN-TO-EARTH, no nonsense ad- ministrator. A man who puts "Good Government" ahead of "partisan politics." This is the emerging image of Mayor James Stephenson. It is an image which was constructed during his recent cam- paign, and has been carefully nurtured since his election. And he's made it fair- ly believable . if you don't know much about city government. Two recent examples of the emerging Stephenson style stand out. chris parks AT MONDAY night's council meeting, the GOP announced plans to ax liberal Democratic planing commission member Ethel Lewis. Democratic council mem- bers cried foul, pointing out that failure to re-appoint Lewis was a blatantly poli- tical maneuver. Stephenson's response was a masterpiece of political bull. He told radio commentator Ted Heu- zel the next morning that he has always felt that ideology should not enter into the appointments process - that the city should be glad it has public spirited citi- zens willing to selflessly devote their time etc., etc. Lewis, he said, has served the city well in her term, but should not be expected to carry the burden alone. THE FACT IS that Stephenson's pedan- tic civics lecture has no relevance to the way politics in this city is played by the Democrats, Republicans or HRP. tIe would have us ignore this point, but to do so would necessitate a heavy-handed rewrite of history. Republicans pack committees with Re- publicans and Democrats pack them with Democrats. It's a game Stephenson knows well and plays with facility. Two years ago when the Democrats were in power, the then mayor Robert Harris appointed a Ward Boundary com- mission heavily weighted in favor of the Democrats. James Stephenson, then a councilman from the fourth ward, spearheaded a GOP drive aimed at stalling and obstruct- ing the operation of the committee with the hope that new elections would result in a GOP majority on council which could force a change in committee ideological composition. The maneuver proved successful when, after last year's election, the GOP - along with HRP - forced major changes in the composition of the committee. Missing from Stephenson's actions in this affair was his new-found belief that ideology is not an important factor in committee membership. His current posi- tion sounds good only if you are unaware of the hypocrisy which underlies it. ANOTHER EXAMPLE of the "Stephen- son Smooth Shuffle" was the defeat of a resolution calling for the recognition of Gay Pride Week - a measure which had been approved by a Democrat-HRP' coalition on council last year. Stephenson explained Monday night that he opposed the resolution on two bases: (1) Such resolutions are "extraneous" and take away time which could be spent on "relevant city business," and (2) It has not been clearly established that gays, by their sexual preference, have made a significant contribution to the city. Once again, to the generally ignorant, this sounds fairly logical. It's hard to argue that ceremonial re- solutions tend to be silly and "extraneous" in general. And it is also technically true that no searching appraisal of the role of gays in the community was offered as evi- dence to support passage of the Gay Pride Week resolution. But again, the Stephenson style thrives on omission. What he does not say is that the GOP has never questioned routine, ceremonial resolutions in the past when they were voted for the benefit of "ac- ceptable" groups such as Jaycees and their ilk. Nor have these group's contri- butions to the community ever been sub- jected to any searching appraisal prior to their being officially honored. Its just one of those things which city councils do, as a matter of course. It is pro forma and routine. But Stephenson was dead set against having the city of Ann Arbor recognize the existence of gays as a vital and real part of the community. Once again he sought to cloak his purely political mo- tives in the mantle of efficiency and no- nonsense government. DON'T BUY ANY used civics lectures from this man, and beware of Republicans (or anyone else for that matter) bearing "Good Government." Because politics is still politics and poli- ticians are still politicians. And if the people of, Ann Arbo believe they're get- ting sound, non-partisan government from James Stephenson, they're being slickered by one of the best. MAYOR JAMES STEPHENSON: His current position sounds good only if you are unaware of the hypocrisy which underlies it. THE Summer Daily Siumer Idi/ion of 7IE Ml(CH1IGAN DAILY Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Wednesday, June 6, 1973 News Phone: 764-0552 Poone earings HILE IT IS somewhat reassuring to have so zealous an advocate of Constitutional justice as Senator Sam Ervin spearheading the investigation into the Wat- ergate Scandal, his insistence that the Senate inquiry not be suspended threatens the very endeavor it is os- tensibly attempting to assist: the prosecution of those who betrayed the nublic trust by perpetrating and cov- ering up the Watereate crimes. For, however effective Ervin's Select Senate Com- mittee has heretofore been in heightening the public's awareness of various official wrongdoings, it has become all too clear that the continuing series of televised hear- ings may only prime future defendants to contrive plausible 'alihis. It rrav render virtually impossible the task of findin't an imnartial jury, composed of people not already inficoed with the whole panoply of heresay and innuendo which has been the hearings' most not- able product. THE DAILY does not buy Ervin's contention that to curb the Committee's efforts would compromise the "peoples' rixbt to know." For just how informative can the committee be) It must be content to scratch the surface of the Watersate iceberg, bouncing around from topic to tonic, ever fiehting the pressures of those who wish to "exnedite" matters without laying the proper groundwnork bforeband. In addition, members are wont to use the hearings as either a partisan or personal in- strument: commentators have been quick to note that the ferocity of ouestioning has often broken down along predictable partisan lines. Clearly, the meager returns offered by the Ervin committee do not in themselves justify the loathsome possibility that criminal proceedings be thrown out on legal technicalities. WHAT IS NEEDED is someone to fumigate the Water- gate investigation of even the slightest taint of po- litical influence. We believe that Archibald Cox is such a man, and that his work should be conducted complete- ly free from either Senate or White House interference. While exposing the whole sordid affair may become more tedious and less sensationalistic in the process, we think it far preferable to have justice delayed than justice denied. Letters to The Daily Presidential precedent To The Daily: WHY DID Professor Paul Kaup- er of the Law School of the Uni- versity of Michigan omit (in The Daily, June 1), President Andrew Johnson from the Presidents (Jef- ferson, Lincoln, Truman) who had confrontations with Congress and the Supreme Court? Was it the psychologist's blind spot, political bias or censorship? Who knows? (Certainly no veteran sportswrit- er would omit the winning touch- down from a hard fought game in the stadium.) In his book, Second Consul, Pro- fessor E. W. Waugh gives the names of three attorneys who act- ed as counsel for the defense of President Andrew Johnson in 1868. Since the impeachment charges in- cluded his presidential veto of an Act of Congress, it was a great victory for the presidency that the Senate failed by one vote to re- move Johnson from the White House. One of the attorneys, William M. Evarts, spoke before the Senate and stated that the Cabinet had agreed the vetoed act was "uncon- stitutional". Why a similar re- sponse to the Congress in 1973 should appear 'constitutionally in- appropriate" seems very pecu- liar, as the veto of bills passed by both Houses is roughly parallel. Certainly President Johnson's ac- tion, with his Cabinet's aproval, of vetoing the Tenure of Office Act was clearly constitutional and leg- al. So, conclusively, was his open defense, handled by his chosen at- tornies, B. R. Curtis, William M. Evarts and William S. Groesbeck. This incident is surely a precedent for a President of replying to charges made by Congress and made to the Senate as a jury. -Paul Hubbell Emeritus Prof. in History, E.M.U. - Maybe we could get 'em to build us a beach cabana, storage shed, redwood fence and put in electric heating, too. We got as many kooks and Commies here as they have out in San Clemente.'