4
OPINION
Page 4.
Saturday, September 11, 1982
The Michigan Daily 4
Headlee: Planning ahead for
higher ed
Republican gubernatorial can-
didate Richard Headlee has touted
himself as a "citizen's" candidate
who advocates "running the state
like a business." The Farmington
Hills insurance executive proposes a
10-point plan' for resurrecting the
state's sagging economy which calls
for no tax increases. Still, he insists
that funding for education should
remain a top priority. This week,
Daily staff writer Kevin Tottis spoke
with Headlee about his commitment
to higher education and to the
University.
I
Daily: What role would this planning
function have? Do you worry about it
impinging on academic freedom?
Headlee: I guess I fear explosive
tuition rates and the graduation of
students who do not have the tools to
cope with society more. Education has
failed our society in terms of invest-
ment, but it's not because of the people
in education, it's because of the lack
of investment.
Daily: What are some of the specifics
of state-level planning?
Headlee: There should be a
correlation of activities. There's no
reason you should have duplication
among the state's institutions. The
shareholders-the taxpayers of the
state-are getting fed up, the students
are getting fed up with tuition rates.
We're going to have to say if you want
to study the classics, you'll have to do it
at Wayne State or the University of
Michigan, if you want to study certain
management courses, you'll have to do
it at Michigan State.
Daily: Would cutting back on
duplication involve eliminating any in-
stitutions?
Headlee: I think you may consider it.
Those are tough decisions that have to
be made; there's turf involved. But
we're talking about living in an era of
finite resources. You can't go around
telling everyone you're going to give
them more.
Of course, I don't have any of the
specifics. That would be up to -the
,people on the planning board-the
people who understand education. Out-
standing people in the state, such as the
president of this university, the
president of Oakland University, for-
mer college presidents, and George
Romney are all people who have in-
dicated that some kind of blue-ribbon
planning group is one way to preserve
state institutions. We had one in the
state that went out of existence. It
wouldn't go out of existence with me.
Daily: Do you think it will be
necessary to cut certain areas of the
University of Michigan?
Headlee: It just depends. It depends
on what a planning commission says.
And that has to be a nonpartisan ap-
pointed commission that understands
the importance of education, that
doesn't have any ox to gore.
Daily: Where will the money come
from for higher education? Do you
think you can improve education
without breaking your promise not to
increase taxes?
Headlee: Yes, because the problem is
spending in other areas. The problem is
the mismanagement of the Democratic
legislature. If you increase taxes you
just drive jobs out of the state. We don't
need any more of that.
Daily: What about your commitment
to state employees? You said that
teachers who are currently striking
should be fired...
Headlee: ... should be replaced.
Daily: What's the difference?
Headlee: They resign. When you
don't show up for work, that's a
resignation. The law prohibits public
employees' strikes in Michigan. Gover-
nment should be of laws, not men.
Daily: What commitment do you
have to hiring women and minorities?
Do you have affirmative action goals?
Headlee: I don't have any problem
with women or minorities. But when
someone asks me what I've done for
blacks, I have to respond that I haven't
done anything for blacks, I haven't
done anything for whites, I haven't
done anything for women or men. I try
to make my decisions based on what's
fair, what's responsible, and I would do
the same as governor.
Daily: You've said in campaign
statements that education is a top
priority, but what about higher
education?
Headlee: I've called for a strategic
planning function for higher education.
The state's contribution to higher
education continues to decline. By
failure to have a planning commission,
those people who entered first grade
today obviously are not going to be
prepared for the job market when they
graduate in 1994. We're advancing
toward a high technology society, yet
we don't think it's necessary to have
math or science in the ninth, tenth,
eleventh grade. We're going to have a
lot of unhappy, unprepared people. We
spend a billion dollars a year on higher
education and there's no correlation
between what goes on in higher
education and reality and what goes on
from institution to institution.
Daily Photo by DEBORAH LEWIS
RICHARD HEADLEE, Republican candidate for governor, proposes creating a statewide planning commission for
Michigan's higher education institut
Daily: What would you say to the
voters of the state who are dependent
upon social programs, who are afraid of
what Richard Headlee might do to them
in office?.
Headlee: I would guess that the
people relying on the public sector only
have to recognize that if they're able-
bodied, they'll have to work. I would
say that the best thing they could hope
for is a fellow like Dick Headlee who'll
run the state like a business. Currently
the bureaucracy is taking too much of
the money and it's not really getting
down to the people who need help.
Daily: A Detroit News poll put you 17
percent behind (Democratic guber-
natorial candidate James) Blanchard.
Headlee: That really doesn't concern
me. Blanchard's got the support of the
United Auto Workers, the Michigan
Education Association, the Teamsters,
Coleman Young, all the heavyweights I
beat in 1978 with the Headlee amen-
dment. But I'll give it my best shot. I'm
the only one running who's taking a
$100,000 paycut to run. I'm doing ,it
because the state needs someone wh
can build a management team for it
$10 billion business.
Daily: Do you think you're behind
Blanchard?
Headlee: Sure, he started in January.
Dialogue appears weekly on
Opinion Page.
the
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan
Wasserman
420lMaynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Vol. XCIII, No. 3
Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board
PrSQO'LE ACLVC MS OF TRYtN6-
To Dr1-T~oY CONST\UT1ONAL
GOV~NMHelms
sewse -I Ww~T CouUES
TO BA 1 - SUPREMEWORkT
FRO 1\U UL1N@ QW GCQOL
vN
LAW WOULD Me- TECON~T
I\rE CAT'.Ve OF A MOIAeNTP Y
MRA3o~i1Y
WhYo sAy; STS &O N6 -w
To Be MOMEN~TARY?'
4-Z
[s -
A
Cheer up, Ron
P RESIDENT Reagan says he's the government's saving. After all, $1.9
very sad. billion makes a heck of a down
The poor dear-those nasty people in payment on a Trident sub.
the House and Senate just overrode his Second, the president shouldn't get
veto of the appropriations bill, and the tearful about the appropriation's bill
president doesn't think anyone loves sinking too much money into frivolous
him anymore. programs like aid to higher education.
h"No, I'm not angry," the president According to nearly all accounts, most
sobbed to reporters last night. "I'm of the additional funds in the bill will go
just terribly, terribly hurt . . Oh, I to aid programs designed for the most
wish they'd behaved differently, but impoverished students; the systematic
then everybody makes mistakes." elimination of financial aid to higher
Now that's no way for our president education should continue virtually
to talk. Certainly after his long string Third, it looks like the president will
of impressive-at times astonishing- T ik en
legislative victories, President Reagan get his Caribbean Basin Initiative after
should be able to take this one on the .all. When the president vetoed this
chin. To help him out in his time of bill, he also vetoed the provision in the
need, here are a few thoughts to cheer bill that provided funds for the Carib-
him up: bean economic aid program. (If
First, despite all the president's you're wondering why the president
criticism of the congressional "budget first proposed the plan, then vetoed it,
busters," this budget-busting ap- don't ask.) Many observers felt that, if
propriations bill will actually spend Congress failed to override the
$1.9 billion less than Reagan's original president's veto, the plan didn't have a
spending proposal. Instead of getting chance of getting funds. Now it does.
gall down in the mouth and saying that All in all then, it wasn't a bad day's
"the big spenders won," Reagan -work. With an override like that, who
held be esta r abo l thegony needs a successful veto.
should be ecstatic about all the money
Special operations-a type of
warfare long shunned by U.S.
policymakers because of its
abiding associations with the
Vietnam War-is about to make a
com~eback under the Reagan ad-
ministration. In a major
statement on U.S. strategy, ad-
ministration leaders recently
called for the revival of the
"special warfare" forces that
were widely used in Vietnam and
then largely forgotten when the
war ended.
In Vietnam, the watchword of
U.S. strategy was "counter-in-
surgency"-a combination of
political, economic, and military
measures designed to isolate and
finally eradicate the un-
derground guerrillas. Some of
these tactics are being used again
today-notably in El Salvador.
BUT THIS is just a small part
of what the Pentagon is planning.
Beyond such essentially defen-
sive measures, the ad-
ministration wants to employ
special warfare forces in offen-
sive operations designed to un-
dermine the economic and
military capacity of pro-Soviet
regimes. Such tactics can include
hit-and-run sabotage,
assassinations, psychological
warfare, and recruitment of anti-
government commandos.
Offensive operations of this
sort were the primary function of
the "special warfare" forces
when they were first employed in
the late 1950s. As envisioned by
U.S. strategists at the time, the
purpose of these forces was to
disrupt Soviet rear area
operations in Eastern Europe by
organizing guerrilla bands com-
posed of anti-communist
American.
gu errillas:
Here they
come again
which has long viewed the special
forces as a sort of private army.
Following the Watergate
disclosures, however, such
operations were officially
discouraged and the special units
were largely confined to training
and advisory functions. Now,
with the ban on CIA-conducted
covert operations lifted, the ad-
ministration also is contem-
plating renewed offensive
operations by the special warfare
units.
Already, a substantial Green
Beret presence is in Honduras,
where the United States is
helping to organize a small .army
of anti-Sandinista commandos
for hit-and-run attacks on gover-
nment installations in Nicaragua.
The commando plan reportedly
was approved by President
Reagan last winter and brought
up to the operational stage during
the spring and early summer.
ADVOCATES of such special
operations argue that they can tie
up large numbers of enemy for-
ces at little cost to the United
States and in some cases can
neutralize an enemy threat
without requiring the use of
regular U.S. military forces.
But the risk in such a strategy
is the same that resulted in the
United States' long and painfu4
intervention in Indochina: The
failure of commando-type actions
can result in either great
humiliation, as in the Iranian
desert, or a wider war involving
regular U.S. combat troops.
The initiation of special
operations in Eastern Europe in-
volves special risks. While the
Soviet Union is not likely to risk a
superpower confrontation over
By Michael K/are
uF C5 z DIPNT M'EAN
FO VEE-E ROPQISALS To 1YiLn-.j'
SET IN CotNCRETE.. j.,
I. ..Y.
y t
existing "special" organizations.
These units, which include the
Army's Special Forces (the
Green Berets), the Air Force's
Special Operations wing, the
Navy's SEAL (Sea/Air/Land)
commando teams and the Marine
Corps' reconnaisance companies,
will be brought up to full
authorized strength and equipped
with new weapons and support
gear.
PLANS FOR the revival of the
special units were first contained
in Weinberger's "defense
Guidance" for fiscal years 1984-
88, which was submitted to the
services in May. In this
ces to project United States
power where the use of conven-
tional .forces would be
premature, inappropriate or in-
feasible."
In describing the projected
responsibilities of these
revitalized forces, Weinberger
makes it clear that he intends
their use in both defensive and of-
fensive operations. At first, such
forces will be used to counter
Soviet expansionism in the Third
World, but ultimately they will be
used on the periphery of the
U.S.S.R. itself.
"TO EXPLOIT political,
economic, and military