Page 4-Friday,.January 25, 980-The Michigan Daily Jerry Brown, CED could go all the way to New York Jim Spencer looks hopelessly out of place in Des Moi nes, Iowa. Sitting in the one-room Brown for President ltadquarters in downtown Des Moines, Spencer dresses and speaks Califotnia mellow. The bleached-out blond hair end moustache, the cowboy boots and designer jeans, and the California colloquialisms like "crash" and ,mellow" are all more suited for the hest coast than the cornfields of the 'Middle west. 4Spencer is one of a core of Califor- ians who are spearheading the residential aspirations of the state's young governor, Edmund Gerald 'rown. Brown's Iowa campaign !manager was from the California lobby group based in Washington D.C. Spen- cer, a San Franciscan, is one of the top organizers of California's Campaign for an Economic Democracy-CED. CED HAS NOT officially endorsed Brown's candidacy, but the presence of Spencer and other CED heads in Brown offices all over the primary states makes any official announcement a mere formality. CED is backing Brown, nd the non-partisan lobby group'and its army of volunteer laborers may be enough to keep the governor's faltering presidential cam- paign from folding before convention time. Campaign for- an Economic Democracy is the organization largely left over from activist Tom Hayden's losing bid for California's U.S. Senate seat back in 1978. The organization is now a network of mostly volunteer laborers, working for liberal causes and candidates coast to coast. But CED's greatest and most visible successes have been in its home base, California, where the group has put its liberal network to the stump for rent control measures and the campaigns of local liberals in school boards and coun- ty seats across the state. THE CAMPAIGN FOR AN Economic Democracy derives much of its success from the personality of its mentor, Tom Hayden, and the box-office draw and financial resources of Hayden's wife, actress Jane Fonda. But in politics, power is influence,and it is here where CED has succeeded where other liberal lobbies have faltered. CED's power in California politics is derived; from its access to Jerry Br- own, and so the Campaign has made it their vested interest to see that Brown is governor for a long, long time. That explains why CED-a liberal, left-wing organization by almost any barometer-would back, and work en- dlessly, for a presidential candidate who has called for a constitutional amendment to balance the federal budget. That would also explain why CED, a lobby group used to being on the adver- By Keith Richburg sarial side of California politics, would break rank and principle to campaign for one of the politicians they've been lobbying against for two years. SPENCER EXPLAINED succinctly but candidly the symbiotic relationship between CED and Brown that sent him and other group members into the cor- nfields of Iowa and the snow of New En- gland: "Jerry Brown is the only cer has suggested that CED may mount an all-out effort, and virtually deluge the state with some of Califor- nia's best and most effective CED organizers. In supporting and working for Jerry Brown, CED is trying to accomplish on a national scale what they have already done in California - influence the shape of policy by getting a CED 's power in California politics is derived from its access to Jerry Brown, and so the Campaign has made it their vested interest to see that Brown is governor for a long, long time. support Jerry Brown over any other candidate. Brown has been a consistent believer in "no-nukes," and has expan- ded his own state's investment in solar power as ail alternative. And Spencer recalls how at a meeting of pro-Kennedy gay rights activists, he had to plead with them to look at the governor's# record on gay rights in California. Brown is one of the few politicians anywhere to openly court the gay vote. Brown has recognized CED's influen- ce in the state, and has likewise courted their support. The group has won several important liberal appointments to, local posts, and Spencer insists that when CED talks, the governor really listens. Part of this comes from the frien- dship thathas developed between Brown and Tom Hayden, the former street activist of the 1968 Democratic convention. The relationship between the two was originally an adversary one, a lobbyist and the politician he was trying to pressure. But Hayden and Brown have developed a friendship based on respect and, in some ways, mutual convenience. Hayden is the governor's link to California's large, and politically liberal community. Jerry Brown is Hayden's lin'k to the political establishment, to the Califor nia executive authority. As. long as Brown is governor, Hayden-and his CED-will have access to the gover- nor's mansion (or the bachelor apar- tment, as the case may be). BARRING SOME unforeseen event, like a nuclear attack, no one really ex- pects Jerry Brown and his outer-space platformto win the 1980 Democratic presidential nomination. But when Spencer says "Jerry Brown is in this race tostaysall the way to the conven- tion," one can only believe he is right. Brown enjoys being the odd-man-out, addressing the issues that other can- didates are ignoring, and offering his alternative policies for the future. If not in 1980, then possibly 1984 or 1988. . . As Jerry Brown is fond of saying, in the year 2000, he will be younger than Ronald Reagan is today. That strikes a chord remarkably similar to the slogan of Tom Hayden's 1978 Senate race-"The Radicalism of the 1960s has become the common sense of the 1970s." Brown's platform-"Save the earth, protect the people, and explore the. universe"-now sounds "flakey," like the prelude to Star Trek. Maybe the flakiness of the 1970s may find a sym- pathetic audience somewhere down the line in the '80s or '90s. But as long as CED is around, the issues Jerry Brown addresses will never just fade away. Daily Editorial Director Keith Richburg just returned from Iowa where he ,covered the Iowa Caucuses. *0 politician I can call on the telephone, and he actually listens to me-to me!" CED put two members in Iowa to prop up the governor's token campaign there. In New Hampshire, where Brown has made a more concerted ef- fort, there are a dozen CED members organizing the state for Jerry Brown. And in Wisconsin, the one state Brown has boldly predicted he will win, Spen- sympathetic ear in the oval office. CED is willing to overlook Brown's stand on the balanced budget, concentrating in- stead on those areas where their views are compatible. ON NUCLEAR power, for instance, Spencer insists that anyone who has ever spent an hour of their week working against nuclear p.ower must 4 &b 340Igan 4a1I, Ninety Years of Editorial Freedom Vol. XC, No. 94 News Phone: 764-0552 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan RC Ck FEGG~R 'Z 1560P- -MEw SHAH! O~F C-00 ~AMATNT' / F1 3Cfttll}AR i OF CeOr', /CAe1e is Wi~ g~~ATOF 'A1At~) 3 y _. tR 1w11+'7 12-30 ~plbomitr Awfllel ,M15 ( No registration SE-UJt7TAPS'P- ' K)PME, A t )6W HD. _TW 3k cWiv6 AM1 "f) W.O IT MAY NOT seem very surprising that a student newspaper on a college campus should oppose registration for the draft. Indeed, among many students, the immediate, almost knee-jerk reactions to any suggestion that 18-26 year olds be required to register for the selective service system are fear, outrage, and resentment. There are, however, several com- pelling reasons - not rooted in emotionalism - why draft registration, as called for by President tarter Wednesday night, is not dIesirable. : Registration is a major step toward resumption of the draft: Although there is some physical distance bet- ween registration and actual service - to t'egister names in a computer is rather easy; to initiate training is far miore difficult - there is a much smaller philosophical distance bet- ween the two. Once the selective ser- yice systen is in place, it would be only 4 small jump for any hawkish gover- 11ment advisors to urge the president to ,initiate a draft program and even a war. After the' experience of Vietnam, finany Americans are justifiably hesitant about any draft program or military initiatives. It can be assumed that most citizens in this country would favor a draft, and possibly war, if they perceived a clear and present threat to the security of this country. The problem with Carter's registration, plan, however, is that such a threat does not yet exist. Clearly, the Soviet Union has demonstrated in recent weeks an un- settling aggressiveness, and no doubt much of this bold adventuring is the result of the perceived weakness of the U.S. Yet, the people of this country, who seem to be behind renewed defen- se efforts, must consider whether it is worth going to war over Afghanistan, or Pakistan, or even Iran. In many respects, the question will come down to oil. If the Soviets 'are in- tent on eventually taking over the Mideast oil fields, then the U.S. might very well be compelled to enter a war. Yet, there is an increasing sentiment, point is that there is not now an im- mediate threat to the oil fields. The U.S. should wait until there. is such a threat -- which may not even, develop - before it moves to re-initiate registration for the draft. Many consider this registration plan a political and diplomatic move - it is intended to show that the U.S. is not weak, and will not stand for Soviet aggression. - , However, such a gesture is in reality quite impotent. Because registration will not significantly spee up preparedness of troops in an emergen- cy; because volunteer forces are suf- icient to stave off any present threat; and because the Soviets could well laugh at any U.S. move short of renewed draft and deployment of troops, the costs of registration are not worth any benefits. For-the time being, the U.S. infusion of military and economic aid to Pakistan is sufficient. It is hoped that the Soviets will be deterred from any further aggression by this show of-sup- port and the numerous sanctions and outcries fron around the world. If and when the Soviets decide to move into another country, and thereby threaten the balance of world power and the precious oil fields, the registration and draft programs could be considered. "Wait and see" may be a frustrating strategy for those anxious to reassert U.S. strength, but it may prevent World War III. EDITORIAL STAFF Sue Warner .. .........................EDITOR-IN-CHIEF Richard Berke, . Julie RoVner.......... MANAGING EDITORS Michael Arkush, Keith Richburg. EDITORIAL DIRECTORS Brian Blanchard...................UNIVERSITY EDITOR Judy Rakowsky ..........................CITY EDITOR Shelley Wolson................... PERSONNEL DIRECTOR Amy Saltzman ..........................FEATURES EDITOR Leonard Bernstein..................SPECIAL PROJECTS R.J. Smith, Eric Zorn ...................... ARTS EDITORS Owen Gleiberman, Elizabeth Slowik.... MAGAZINE EDITORS STAFF WRITERS-Sara Anspach, Julie Brown, Richard Blan- chard, Mitch Cantor, Sefany Cooperman, Amy Diamond. Mari- anne Egri, Julie Engebrecht, Mary Faranski, Joyce Frieden' Greg Gallopulos; John Goyer, Patricia Hagen Marion Halberg, Alison Hirschel, Steve Hook, Elisa Issacson, Paula Lashinsky, Marty Levine, Adrienne Lyons, Tom Mirga, Mark Parrent, Beth Bersky, Beth Rosenberg, William Thompson, Charles Thomson, Howard Witt, Jeff Wolff, Tim Yagle. Contrary to popular belief, there are no compelling reasons for people to go, hungry, yet people throughout the world are starving to death at the rate of 15,000 a day. What explains the world hunger probelm? To answer that question, one must understand a vast interconnected system established world-wide over the past centuries. At its core is capitalistic enterprise. The fact is, there are culturally sufficient land, human and other input resources to feed every man, woman ans child on earth an adequately nutritious diet. But these resources are not con- trolled by the people they might feed; they are controlled by rich multinational corporations and super farmers who are concerned, only with adding weight to their already very fat wallets. IN THE UNITED States, over half of all cultivated farmland is owned by 5.5 per cent of the far- mers. These farmers (actually, in most cases they are businesses such as Standard Oil, Ralston Purina, Southern Pacific, Bank of America, Dow Chemical and John Deere) continue to increase their power and push small family farmers out of business. Over the last 20 years small far- mers have been going out of business at the rate of 1900 a week. The American Agricultural Marketing Association estimates that by Why are people starving to death? By Doug Herring 1985 agribusiness giants will con- trol 75 per cent of all American food production. In underdeveloped countries where hunger is often a major problem, land resources are just as poorly distributed. A 1971 study of 83 underdeveloped coun- tries by the Food and Agriculture Organiztion (FAO) found that 3 per cent of all the landowners controlled 80 per cent of'all the farmland. Not 9nly do the small landholders together own a frac- tion of available land-a majority of farmworkers own no land at all. According to a ,Cornell University study, the landless make up the majority of the rural labor force in undeveloped coun- tries. In many Asian and South American countries they represent 80 to 90 per cent of the labor force. It might not seem like such a problem for a small group of people to control food-producing resources. One would even think that they could be more efficient producers, considering the large scale they operate on. (Actually, large farms are less efficient per acre than small farms, sometimes as must as 15 times less efficient.) But a problem arises, particularly in un- developed countries, when these producers choose not to grow grains and vegetables for human consumption, but rather cotton or tobacco, because they are more profitable. Or they grow carnations, strawberries, or asparagus for export to foreign luxury markets, such as the U.S. This often occurs in fertile valleys whose inhabitants are on near-starvation diets. ' PROFITABILITY, not human needs, determines what is grown and who gets it. This type of twisted morality allows elites to drive Mercedes and live on plush estates while millions die each year for lack of enough to eat. We must rearrange our priorities if this is to change, because even improvements in food-producing technologies, which should provide more food for the hungry, serve only to further enrich the large agribusinesses. The .hunger issue is more com- plicated than this article suggests; it is, however, definitely much more of a political problem than a technological problem. The Committee Concerned with World Hunger is a student organization attempting to un- derstand, this problem more thoroughly and make the com- munity more aware of the causes of hunger and starvation. We are planning a two-day Con- ference of Infant and Child Malnutrition to be held on cam- pus April 2nd and 3rd and have tentatively scheduled a benefit concert by Harry Chapin. The conference will feature lectures .by experts in nutrition and the politics of hunger. Frances Moore Lappe, author of Diet for a Small Planet and Food First, is one of the speakers scheduled. In addition to independent ac- tion groups the Committee Con- cerned with World Hunger meets bi-weekly to plan and coordinate activities. Anyone interested in additional information about our group or world hunger may con- tact Pat Gallagher (995-1978) or Doug Herring (995-5455). 0. _ Doug Herring is a member of the Committee Concerned with World Hunger. Letters to the Daily To the Daily: I read with great interest your article in Sunday's paper in which Earl Greene claimed he had eighty pleded and eagerly waiting volunteers for his cam- naign. Were I a cynic. I might Mr. Green to reveal the names of his hidden workforce. On behalf of the concerned voters, I urge him to do -so. In the words of a great poet: Much, under the cloak of in Iran. As members of Rackham Student Government, we would like to state that these views are Mr. Milbrath's personal opinions and do not express the position of RSG on this matter. During the last RSG meeting, Mr. Milbrath proposed a To The Daily:. The - Daily seriously misunder- stood Michael Harrington's statement on wage and price con- trols. Never did he allude that "price controls, as opposed to wage and price controls were the root of stagflation in the economy". Rather he stated that wage and price controls need not 1 BUSINESS STAFF IIA CULBERSON..........................Business Manager