0 OPINION Page 4 Saturday, April 2, 1983 The Michigan Daily I die etdenatenist oMig Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Stewart Vol. XCIII, No. 144 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Morris: A fresh start ,; WORSE WA[ R euCHAPUNI($QN DOEx r PAMMIT, j (9F T WO TERM Mayor Louis Belcher has grown used to his job as leader of city council and the power that goes with it. He has grown so used to the job, in fact, that he now abuses his position, and often runs roughshod over council. Thus, the Republican is not the best suited to serve as Ann Arbor's mayor. Instead, Democratic Councilmem- ber Leslie Morris, though not as ex- perienced as the mayor in city ad- ministration, is the more conscientious choice for mayor, ahead of American Independent Paul Jensen and Belcher. Morris has come a long way in five years as Second Ward councilmember through hard work and determination. She has the capacity to work with the council, instead of employing Belcher's style of overbearing direc- tion. She has worked well on social service issues, including promotion of poverty aid, public housing, day care centers, the weatherization proposal, and others. Belcher clearly has exceeded the bounds of the Ann Arbor city gover- nment, which calls for the mayor to be a part of the strong group direction of city council rather than to be a strong independent leader. Nowhere is this more evident than in the recent controversy over Belcher's plans for expansion of the city airport. The mayor went so far as to get state funds allocated for the project without the council's approval - almost cer- tainly a violation oflederal law. His overbearing leadership, which, has led some to dub him "King Louis," also threatens Ann Arbor's $5 marijuana law. Belcher has been the one prominent politician to fight for the law's repeal. After a petition drive and a vote by council members both failed to place the repeal proposal on next week's ballot, Belcher pressed on- ward, finally badgering a reluctant Republican majority into putting the question before the voters. Morris, however, opposes the pot law repeal, and also outshines Belcher on what to emphasize to bring better economic health to the city. The Democrat stresses the need for small business incentives and would use tax abatements only sparingly, if at all. Belcher, though, is pushing for heavy use of tax breaks to woo high-tech in- dustry to Ann Arbor. The practice of- ten costs the city more in revenue than is gained in jobs. Third-party candidate Jensen, the self-described "street-person," has of- fered little to the campaign other than a few good laughs. He has failed to establish himself as a serious can- didate with solid positions on the relevant campaign issues. Morris, then, is the best choice. But to be an effective mayor, she will need to develop a keener sense of leader- ship, though not to the extremes Belcher has gone. The Democrat also needs to come up with a better under- standing of the complexities of the city's economy. Though Morris has a few things to learn, she can repair the damage done to the reputation of Ann Arbor's mayor's office, and work well with council. lJ 0 0 6 S 0 0 0 1f LETTERS TO THE DAILY: Law Review plan explained To the Daily: We were very interested in the views of Ms. Yolanda Lyles regarding the Michigan Law Review's new selection process. ("Plan doesn't go far enough," Daily March 30). However, her criticisms are inapplicable; they do not go to the plan adopted. The plan is as follows. The top fifteen students in the class will receive invitations automatically. Then, at the close of the year, there will be a writing competition. Entries will receive a score between 0.1 and 0.4. The top eight of these entries will receive invitations automatically. The remainder of the entries will be divided into two groups, with only the top 50% being eligible for further con- sideration. Within this group, an entrant's writing score will be added to his/her grade point average to yield a "boosted G.P.A.," on the basis of which the remaining slots will be filled. If fewer than two minority students are chosen through this process, the top minority entrants in the eligible group will'receive in- vitations, in order to ensure that at least two members of minority groups are chosen. Ms. Lyles does not "understand why only two minority students will be offered membership." But the plan does not mandate that only two minority students will be offered membership; it requires that at least two minority studen- ts will be offered membership. Potentially, every slot could be filled by a minority student. This should become apparent upon even a cursory examination of the plan. Thus, Ms. Lyles' characterization that the proposal would "allow a disproportionately small number of minorities into the organization" is ill-conceived. Ms. Lyles further states that "the proposal is, in itself, totally, degrading." If it were true that the Review would allow only two minority students membership, we would share her sentiment. However quite the contary, the plan requires that at least two minority students be offered membership. She contends that "the editorial board is merely taking action in order to pacify the cries of those concerned with discrimination in this organization." This is ridiculous. The board explicitly concerned itself with the necessity of rectifying the in-. justice of past discrimination. In fact, it sought affirmatively to in- clude the views of minority students, realizing that such in- put is invaluable to such an in- fluential publication. In conclusion, we commend the Review's editorial board for its responsible and responsive ap- proach. Ms. Lyles' hostility, while well-intentioned, is misdirected. - James W. Clark John C. Coe March 31 0 6 City council choices THIS YEAR'S city council elections present voters with interesting races in all wards but the second, where Republican Thomas Deem is running unopposed. In other wards, the Democrats have put together the best package of ideas, programs, and leadership abilities. In the First Ward, Democrat Lowell Peterson is a tried and tested leader. As a current council member, Peter- son has proven himself and is one of the more articulate Democrats. He's also shown marked ability and interest in representing student interests. Peterson's opponents, Republican Letty Wickliffe, demonstrated sin- cerity, but she, like most of her Republican counterparts, has placed too much emphasis on the private sec- tor to provide relief from the current economic malaise. Peterson, however, has been committed to human services and taking quick .action to rescue 'people who slip between the cracks of America's great economic miracle." The Third Ward offers voters a stark contrast. Virginia Johansen has established herself as a steady follower of the Republican line, while Democrat Jeff Epton has come out against the huge tax breaks the current Republican-controlled council has given large corporations. Epton is the better choice as he has shown him- self to be energetic and innovative and an avid backer of human service programs that Johansen seems willing to cut in favor ot attracting big businesses to Ann Arbor. Fourth Ward Democrat John Powell is a dedicated, hard worker who seems to really care about his constituents as witnessed by his door-to-door cam- paign - a practice he says he will con- tinue if elected. Powell's opponent, Republican Larry Hahn has run a lackadaisical campaign that hasbeen rather short on ideas. His patent statement is that he's content with the city as is and only wants to keep it that way. Ann Arbor deserves better and John Powell offers it. Powell has served on the Ann Arbor Board of Education and sees a need for better city planning. He has em- phasized that the city should get something in return for the tax breaks it offers corporations and has said business should be encouraged to provide retraining opportunities for city workers - a marked contrast to Hahn's conservative views on social services. Fifth Ward Republican incumbent Lou Velker has consistently followed a conservative line of helping big businesses and high-tech industries at the expense of depleting the city's tax revenues. Democratic challenger Kathy Edgren does not have Velker's ex- perience,but she is realistic enou h to see that high-tech firms will not be Ann Arbor's economic savior. She has recognized that the core of the city's economy is small business and has suggested that if anything, this is where Ann Arbor should offer tax in- centives. She would like to see the city develop a human services plan to iden- tify priorities and sources of support for Ann Arbor's social programs. Her balancing of both human services and the city's economy makes her the Fifth Ward's better choice. Ex-stu den t appeals dimissal Editor's note: The following is former University medical student Scott Ewing's statement to the Daily concer- ning his recent iunsuccessful lawsuit in federal district court. Ewing argued in court that the medical school unfairly dismissed him from the Inteflex program. By Scott E. Ewing My attention has been called to the Daily's articles about my suit against the Univer- sity (most recently, "Ex-student loses against 'U'," Daily, March 24). Since my at- torneys and I have refused to comment publicly until now, I am not surprised that these articles generally mischaracterize my suit. Good reporting involves reporting all of the facts, not just some, and both sides, not just one. This is admittedly made more difficult when one side talks and the other does not. Consequently, my reticence can no longer continue. Perhaps the most blatant of the Daily's errors is in reporting that the University "agreed to sponsor (me) if (I) chose to retake the (National Board) exam to apply to other medical schools." I wish this were so, for, if it were, my lawsuit would be un- necessary. In fact, I was offered a so-called "shelf" exam, which no medical school in North America will accept as a substitute for the official one. Therefore, the offer was meaningless. It would not enable me to complete my medical studies at any ac- credited school, and thus forced me to file suit. I am taking my case to the U.S. Court of Appeals because the issues that compelled me to bring suit have not yet been ad- dressed. I remain the only student in the student who had nine (9). Nevertheless, he was allowed'to retake the exam. In fact. several students were allowed three attem- pts to pass and one was actually given four tries. People deserve to know that these star- tling facts represent the medical school's own version of what has occurred. Univer- sity counsel chose to enter this evidence un- der seal, apparently to protect the school from embarrassment. Now, however, the information is public, and I encourage doub- ters to check it for themselves. Before I sat for the NBME Part I on my first and only occasion, the Medical School announced in its official publication, the Medical Center Report, "Should a student fail either part of the National Boards, an opportunity is provided to make up the failure in a second exam." Apparently, though, the Medical School is suggesting it is free to set different standards for different students and is not bound by the very rules it itself promulgates. If this decision stands unaltered, a student attending Michigan does so at his own peril. Students with several acceptances would be advised to go elsewhere. Evidence revealed I was accepted at Brown, Harvard, Stan- ford, and Yale, but chose Michigan. Studen- ts must now be forewarned: simply because you commit yourself to Michigan does not mean Michigan commits itself to you. Though my dismissal was largely the result of unreasonable actions by a handful of people, their misrepresentation of my record may have given the impression that a monolithic faculty had acted. In truth, only four instructors, of the 40 or so who taught me, testified against me - and their words were hardly damning. (For example, one labeled me a "good student.") Of the four, one has no advanced degrees of any sort (she had been a counselor). Only one. man's testimony is, to say the very least, disquieting. Dr. Robert Reed, the senior associate dean, testified that everything he said about me in a letter of recommendation is as true today as when he wrote it. Reed wrote I had "done outstanding work" and had "achiev(ed) the honors level." He went on, stating: "I should stress that the Board's 'action (to dismiss Scott) was not taken because of unethical or dishonest behavior nor were his intellectual capabilities in question." Furthermore, "Scott has always been sincere, appropriately concerned with his standing in the Program and behaved in a manner befitting a medical student and future physician." (Reed's letter was en- tered into evidence and is available for public scrutiny.) But Reed's praise is mild when compared to the many supportive letters written by other professors. A typical opinion, ex- pressed under oath by a professor prin- cipally responsible for my last course, was that my "performance was far superior to all of the other students." Further compelling evidence - proffered by the University itself - included: My overall grade average (roughly a B) is con- siderably above the C average necessary for good standing. I won a Medical Student Research Fellowship and two Hopwoods for creative writing (including a major award). I have published in such prestigious jour- nals as the New England Journal of Medicine. And, finally, the University sub- mitted evidence that my IQ is 174. People have asked me how the judge could dismiss monetary damages in this case. He did so by ruling the University has sovereign immunity. This anachronistic concept holds that the University, because it is a state institution, enjoys absolute im- munity from any and all claims for monetary damages, regardless of merit. 0 0 0