4 " } OPINION Page 4 Thursday, November 19, 1981 The Michigan Daily Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Wasserman Vol. XCII, No.61 420 Mynaord St. Ann Arbor, Mt 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board SUfl'LY-MIDF PIE: Beat ingred~ients~ conservatively ,, ~(OOKtr& after triniing with sharp khifG. l / la.c-le upper very gently. C-ru4st A peaceful move _ ( ti/ V t xt V V 9 or la~rger pie, redu.ce 0& by 507. 0os Angeles Times Syndicate IT IS BOTH surprising and refreshing to see President Reagan propose a substantial plan to end the ever- increasing U.S. and Soviet Union arms build-up in Europe. Yesterday, in his most significant move toward cutting back U.S. militarization in Europe, Reagan proposed cancelling U.S. deployment of medium-range nuclear missiles and pulling back troops in western Europe if the Soviets will agree to dismantle 600 missiles they have aimed at European targets. This move shows that, perhaps, the Reagan administration is attempting to commit itself to a peaceful resolution- of U.S.-Soviet difficulties, rather than a vigorous arms race. True, Reagan's speech may indeed be a ploy to shift the nation's interests to foreign policy, thus directing atten- tion away from the embarrassment David Stockman and Richard Allen have caused in recent weeks. And, even more possibly, the president's speech was simply a propaganda move to garner waning western European support and, ultimately increase an- tagonism with the Soviet Union. At this time, however, it is im- possible to judge what the president's true motives are. Nonetheless, it is very encouraging to hear such a call for an end to nuclear deployment from a previously hawkish administration. The dangers of nuclear war in Europe cannot be underestimated. Reagan's statement last "week that possibly, through the use of tactical nuclear weapons, a war in Europe would not lead to an all-out nuclear war is downright frightening. Despite what the president has heretofore maintained, most evidence shows that such a war would be disastrous. A recent study by the International In- stitute for Strategic Studies in London, for instance, claims that it would be impossible for such a war to be con- tained to the continent. President Reagan's announcement is a significant move for the ad- ministration. We hope, however, that it is not empty propoganda and that the president has a true commitment to cutting back increased militarization in Europe. A Rea gan and job' safety Johnny Bettis would like Ronald Reagan to have the experience, just once, of doing a day's work while wearing a full-face rubber mask withfilters. "Let him try it. That might change his mind." Among workers who use them, respirators rank in popularity somewhere below poison ivy. HOWEVER, THE president's economic advisers are enthusiastic about respirators as "cost-effective substitutes for mechanical ventilation.. They want to revise Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA), rules to make respirators an acceptable, permanent solution to airborne toxins on the job. Unions, however, feel that this would sim- ply transfer the burden of maintaining a safe and healthful workplace from employer to employee and they have vowed to fight the plan. - For the 95 members of Oil, Chemical, and Atomic Workers Local 3-974, of which Bettis is president, the fight already has begun. Since April 30, they have been on strike for im- proved health and safety conditions at the TNS Corp. in Jonesboro, Tenn. Among the disputed issues is a management requirement that workers wear respirators for eight hours a day to avoid radioactive and chemical exposures. , THE PLANT melts down depleted uranium and machines it into heavy metal "penetrators," or armor-piercing bullets, for the U.S. military. Though the work is hard, with adequate controls it need not be hazardous. But at TNS, the ventilation system is substandard even by management's estimate, and a black haze of uranium dust envelops much-of the plant. Shortly before workers walked out, the Tennessee division of OSHA found uranium concentrations 13 times over the legal limit. Inhaled in sufficient quantities, the dust can lead to kidney failure. And the tinier particles settle deep in the lungs, where they emit high- energy alpha radiation-a confirmed cancer threat. TWO YEARS ago, the workers elected the OCAW to represent them, and by late 1980, the union was pressing for a plantwide cleanup. Instead, TNS instituted the mandatory By James Crawford respirator rule for workers in dusty produc- tion areas. Employees agreed, but found that the masks interfered with communication and many routine tasks. Also, wearing them for extended periods never was pleasant, with in- plant temperatures reaching as high as 117, degrees F. Even if employees do wear them,there is growing evidence that respirators do not per- form as advertised. In a recent study by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health, one highly rated model malfun- ctioned under the stresses of actual work. Ominously, this was the first time NIOSH had tested any respirator outside the lab. FOR AT LEAST 11 of the TNS workers who have been tested, urine counts were above limits where permanent kidney damage may occur, according to Nuclear Regulatory Commission guidelines. Some were 15 to 20 times over permissible levels. As a result, several workers had to be taken off their regular jobs and moved to non- production areas. By early April, negotiations for a new con-. tract were under way. The union proposed that TNS pay an independent firm to study the plant and make recommendations for engineering controls, so, that respirators could be phased out. Management refused. Meanwhile, concerns were growing about radioactive contamination, whichlmonitoring records show was being tracked throughout the plant and probably taken home on workers' clothing. IN HIS FINAL monthly walk-around, Bettis brought more than 90 hazards to management's attention and warned that not addressing them would ensure a strike. TNS countered with an economic proposal: a 25 percent wage increase over one year, an ad- ditional paid holiday, and various benefit im- provements. But the workers saw health and safety, not money, as the issue. The strike was on. Edward Smith, a spokesman for TNS's parent company, Aerojet Ordnance (itself a subsidiary of General Tire), disagreed. The strike's overriding issue, he argued, is "the union's desire to gain more control within the company over methods of operation." HE SAID THAT TNS is working hard to solve "the very complex airborne dust problem," but that "we're not going to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on this idea one week and that idea a month from now." Smith had "no idea" when new ventilation might be installed, but maintained that respirators were adequate protection if properly used. Workers' high urine levels were "probably spiked intentionally" or a result of failure "to adhere to the procedures and policies with regard to sanitation prior to giving the sample." OCAW health and safety officials refuted this charge by pointing to the number and consistency of abnormal urine levels over many months. "Obviously, the enforcement of the law is very weak," said Steve Wodka, Washington representative of the OCAW. "That's why we're having to pursue this through collective bargaining." The union has criticized regulatory agen-° cies for having what it believes is undue patience with violators of their own rules. The Division of Radiological Health has cited TNS repeatedly over the past two years. But _it* issues no\ fines, and its only san- ction-removal of a company's license to handle radioactive materials-rarely is in- voked. The Reagan administration wants to tran- sfer even more enforcement authority to such state agencies. Thpt, combined with a, relaxation of federal OSHA rules, promises to leave labor and management increasingly on their - own in resolving health and safety problems. The result may be an increasing number of strikes like the one in Jonesboro. "This plant is just a microcosm," predicted Wodka, "of what could occur right across the country if that rule is changedtand employers can strap people into respirators for the rest of their working lives. People will rebel. That's what happened here." Crawford wrote this article for Pacific News Service.'W Protecting the wilderness INTERIOR Secretary James Watt is finally getting some real sniping from Congress on his plans to expand the development of federally-owned wilderness areas. Rep. Manuel Lujan Jr. (R-N.M.) has introduced a resolution in the House Interior Committee that would, in effect, keep Watt from allowing mining or drilling in these regions. It's a significant move, not. only because Lujan is a Republican, but because the Interior Committee ac- tually has the power to take decisive action on the federal leasing of wilder- ness areas. By law, either the House Interior Committee or the Senate Energy Committee can unilaterally forbid the development of federal wilderness areas. Already this year, the Interior Department has issued leases, for development of oil and mineral deposits in several western wilderness areas, including the 40,000-acre Capitan Wilderness in Lujan's district. There's some reason to suspect that Lujan's initiative will succeed. Earlier in the year, the Interior Committee was able to keep the government from allowing mineral exploitation in the Bob Marshall Wilderness area in Mon- tana. Although the pro-development Mountain States Legal Foundation (which, incidentally, was once headed by Watt) has sued to have the commit- tee's action declared unconstitutional, the refusal of the committee to accept the government's program is an en- couraging sign of resistance. The federal government has been en- trusted with the preservation of-not the exploitation of-the nation's wilderness areas. While the areas con- tain some potentially valuable resour- ces, the preserves are unique and should not be destroyed through development. Lujan's proposal is in keeping with the best spirit of the federal wilderness area program and deserves the com- mittee's support. LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Daily editorial on Israel superficial ~$~N~'477 ~~ppISJPE 0i 00 To the Daily: In a recent editorial entitled "A Denial of Freedoms (Nov. 11, 1981), The Michigan Daily provided its readers with a misleading view of, Israeli policies toward the Palestinians. Using the tools of careless editorialists-rhetoric and exaggeration-the Daily chose to pontificate about problems in the Middle East rather than to propose constructive solutions. Rather than simply criticizing Israeli policy, the Daily decided instead to question the legitimacy of Israel as a democratic state based upon a few unfortunate but isolated incidents on the West Bank. - R Objectionable 'actions by a nation do not in themselves make it undemocratic, as the Daily in- fers. Such logic implies that the United States is no longer a democratic country because some of its foreign policies are undesirable. Does the Daily believe this? Israel is indisputably the only democratic state in the Middle East. Dozens of political parties CPI change justified seek political office and all Israeli citizens-including Arabs and Jews-have the right to vote. Policies on the West Bank, even if the Daily deems them ex- cessive, do not change these characteristics of the Israeli political system. Whether the Daily likes it or not, the West Bank is a disputed territory considered to be a war zone by all parties in the Arab- Israeli conflict. From its ivory tower on Maynard Street, the Daily chose to ignore this fact believing that protests on the West Bank cannot be much dif- ferent than a rally on the Diag. Many of the protesters, who so touched the humanitarian anten- nae of the Daily editorial board, are advocates of the Palestine Liberation Organization, a group whose purpose is to destroy the State of Israel. Failure to under- stand the sensitivity of Israelis to the issue of survival and the reality of the threats they face is to miss a crucial factor when judging Israeli policies. Instead of blowing a few isolated incidents out of propor- tion, the Daily should have engaged in a more perceptive analysis of Israel's overall policy toward the Palestinians. However undesirable the Israeli be brought about if represep-O tatives of the Palestinians and the relevant Arab states are willing to negotiate with Israel. To think, as the Daily does, that Israel can unilaterally grant self- rule to the Palestinians is to show ignorance of the history of the Arab-Israeli conflict and traditional procedures of conflict- resolution. The Egyptians and a few Palestinians knocked off ty the PLO for the moderate views, are the only Arabs to date willing to resolve the Palestinian problem through negotiation. I too am troubled by some of Israel's actions on the West bank. But I believe there are more con- structive ways to criticize than painting the popular but misleading picture of leviathan Israel oppressing the Palestinian Arabs. \ By doing so, the Daily has sunk to the moral level of those who prefer to perpetuate this myth as a propaganda device against Israel rather than to settle the root problems of the Arab- Israeli conflict. If the Daily dislikes some of Israel's policies and believes Israel should be more forth- coming in resolving the Palestinian problem, why does it not just say so? By succumbing tom To the Daily: I am writing in response to "Whittling away at the American Dream," (Daily, Nov. 15) written by Frank Viviano for the Pacific News Service. In his article Mr. Viviano tells his readers about the Reagan administration's step to no longer include the cost of buying a home in the calculation of the monthly Consumer Price Index. He then erroneously concludes that this administration's policy is to create "a new division of American Society along property lines." He then goes on to state increases. The administration's point that the proportion of the CPI which is accounted to housing should be decreased, sin- ce it will give a better indication of the cost of living, sounds valid to me. So where does Mr. Viviano get his insight to the administration's attempt "of repudiating the egalitarian materialism of the American dream?" President Reagan is not out to keep any Americans or non- Americans from buying a home! He just wants to make the CPI a more accurate measure of the