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