100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

September 25, 1983 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1983-09-25

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

OPINION

Page 4

Sunday, September 25, 1983

The Michigan Daily

The flour of Billy Frye's thought

VICE PRESIDENT for Academic Affairs and
Provost Billy Frye's speeches are like sif-
ted flour. They have to be examined very carefully
to differentiate between the "flour" and the hot
air.
Frye's report to the faculty Senate Assembly
last Mondy on the progress of the University's
"five-year plan" is a perfect example.
According to Frye, the worst phase of the
budget cutting is over. "The period of uncer-
tainty is past," he said.
All right, if the worst is over, then there won't
The Week
n Review
be any more major budget reviews, right?
Well not exactly. What Frye said is that there
will be no more reviews like those that the
schools of natural resources, art, ane education
had undergone.
According to Frye, there are no major budget
reviews planned for the immediate future,
althczgh "that does not rule out the
possibility."
Time to begin sifting.
Frye did not promise to end the budget
reviews. He merely said that the structure of
the reviews would change.
He cited the length of the reviews as the
cause for 90 percent of the problems enco.un-
tered.
"There is a great deal of room for im-
provement in the review process," Frye said.

~
7 K
Sifting through this Frye-wpeak, one begins to
wonder if the worst is really past or is the Un-
versity taking a breather before it begins the
next round of budget cuts?
In any event, has the outlook really changed?
Billy Frye may feel a bit more optimistic, but
the deans of the various schools and colleges at
the University are probably taking Frye's
speech with a grain of salt or flour, if you like.
Vice-President Hart?
Once again it's time to strike up the band,

hop on the bandwagon, toss your hat into the
ring, and do all the other fun things associated
with a presidential campaign.
When Democratic presidential candidate
Gary Hart rolled into town last Sunday, Ann
Arbor got its first dose of the three p's of a
political campaign: pledges, promises, and
programs.
Hart, a senator from Colorado promised the
more than 400 people in the Union that he would
establish a "Peace Corps II" to fight poverty in
Central America. "The principle enemy is not
communism," he said.,"IT IS POVERTY."
The senator had just returned from a tour of
Honduras, Nicaragua, and El Salvador. He ac-
cused the Reagan administration of having
"the wrong policy for Central America,
because it had focused on the wrong enemy."
In addition to announcing his updated Peace
Corpa program, Hart also pledged to push for
a revival of the Central American common
market and a new international bank for the
region.
Hart admittedly faces an uphill fight for his
party's nomination. That was evident even at
the $50-per-person fundraiser at Dominick's
that followed the senator's speech. In atten-
dance was State Rep. Perry Bullard (D-Ann
Arbor), who is supporting former vice
president Walter Mondale.
Bullard, being the diplomatic type, said Hart
might become the Democratic vice-
presidential nominee.
Striking out
After 15 days of acting like children instead
of teaching them, Ann Arbor school board'
members and teachers agreed upon a new con-
tract, allowing classes to begin.

Sen. Gary Hart (D-Colo.) took a tour of South
about it in a campaign stop this week.
The school board played bully in this dispute,
filing a complaint in U.S. District Court
Tuesday, asking for an injunction' to force
teachers back to work. But Judge Ross Cam-
pbell apparently had had enough of the
schoolyard brawling. He threatened to lock
both sides in a room until they played nice.
To avoid being grounded, teachers and the
board agreed to a settlement giving teachers a
2.5 percent salary increase, considerably less
than the 4 percent they were requesting. In ad-
dition, teachers will be gradually giving up
their current insurance coverage through the
Michigan Educational Special Services Ad-
ministration (MESSA) for a comparable, but
cheaper plan.
The two sides had disagreed vehemently on
the insurance issue. Teachers gave in, though,
agreeing to cut the MESSA coverage on the

Daily Photo by DEBORAH LEWIS
America recently and told Ann Arbor residents
condition that the terms for the third year of
the phase out be negotiated by a third party.
Teachers were miffed because they lost this
year's shoving match. "Most teachers feel (the
2.5 percent raise) is grossly inadequate," said1
Dean Bodley, the vice president of the
teachers' union. "It's almost embarrassing."
More embarrassing was the whole strike,
which almost lasted long enough to force the
board to schedule classes on weekends to make
up for the lost days. As it is, Ann Arbor students
will have shorter vacations during this school
year - unless board members and teachers
have another spat.
The Week in Review was compiled by
Daily staff writer Tom Miller and Daily
editor David Spak.

Eeaedtu Tichigan
Edited and managed by students ot The University of Michigan

vol. XCIV - No. 16

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MJ 48109

Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board
Forgotten symbolism

a
4

W HEN THE William Monroe
Trotter house was established
as a black student center in 1970, those
who lobbied for it saw it as a symbol of
the University's commitment to
educating blacks.
Instead, Trotter house's 13 year
history has become a symbol of the
University's inconsistent, sporadic
support for blacks, and ultimately its
inability to meet their needs.
Blacks wanted the center to serve
both political and social functions ,as a
place where they could artially
escape the presures of a whi e, upper
class university and rally to improve
conditions here.
As early as the mid-seventies,
however, University commitment
started to wane. The concept of a black
student center mutated into a minority
student center, tossing together
blacks, Native Americans, Asians,
and Hispanics under the erroneous
premise that problems are all the
same. The semantic exchange of
'black" for "minority" was indicative
of campus-wide thinking, which tended
to mask blacks' special difficulties
behind the generic "minority''
UTO PIA
WHADYA WANNA
DO TONI6HT?
V t
W4Y 1)WE V -o
6EF CDg-UNK 2ALLT1-1E

category.
Meanwhile, the center has had seven
or eight directors - University of-
ficials can't remember the exact num-
ber - in its 13 years. It also has been
without a director since John Powell
was fired this summer. This has made
it almost impossible for consistent
development of programs.
If Trotter house is ever going to help
blacks, University officials are going
to have to recommit themselves to
solving these problems.
The University has begun to put some
effort into reviving Trotter house. This
summer $70,000 was spent on
renovations. Physical renovations,
however, can fix only a small portion
of the many, more deeply rooted,
problems of the center.
Campus blacks have specific
problems which are not shared by
other minority groups. The center
needs to concentrate more on these,
and stop trying to be everything for
everyone.
Trotter house was conceived as a
symbol of University commitment to
improve conditions for blacks. It has
been a hollow symbol for too long.
WE COULt> 60 -O
A SAR O 2UST 6ET
SOME SEERS AkJO.D
" - \Now

.-".,"...---- E S'3

"Why are wein Lebanon?"
As American involvement in
the Lebanese tragedy deepens,
President Reagan has yet to offer
a clear answer to that question.
And it may well be that, under the
pressure of escalating violence,
Washington has failed to settle on
a long-term strategic plan.
More likely, however, the
president is silent because
talking frankly to the American
people would mean conceding
that, willingly or unintentionally,
the United States has become
Israel's surrogate in Lebanon.
WHEN THE Israelis invaded
Lebanon in June of 1982, they first
claimed the action was designed
to rid their northern boundaries
of terrorists. The administration
had few reservations about that
end, even if it was unsure about
the drastic means.
It was only later, when their
forces were beseiging Beirut,
that Israeli officials spoke openly
of destroying the PLO altogether,
and privately about establishing
a Christian Lebanese state -
much more profound changes in
the strateaicniecture.

Does Reagan
have a plan
for Lebanon?

Israelis know where to go, the
question that we would like to
pose to the world, and to the U.S.
and Israel in particular, is:
'Where should the Palestinians
withdraw to?'"
Indeed, today even more than
before the Lebanon invasion, the
Palestinian question remains the
key to the problem of the Middle
East. And it has never been fur-
ther from resolution. Hence the
significance of another Israeli
aim which Washington has
publicly condemned - but which
it also tacitly indulges now.
That aim is the formalization of
Israeli settlement on the West
Bank, which not only precludes
any resolution in Lebanon, but
almost guarantees a continuing
stalemate there. For Arabs and
Israelis, clearly, the two issues
are inextricably connected.
Ignorance of that fact is behind
the deepening dilemma of
American policy in the Eastern
Mediterranean. For by focusing
on Lebanon alone, rather than
viewing it in the larger context of
the Palestinian issue,
,Washington is being drawn
inexorahly intoacntive- unam-

By Paul Magnelia

of Lebanon ended in a military
and political imbroglio of such
magnitude that the United States
was forced to intervene.
The violence that accompanied
the siege of Beirut, and even
more, its terrible aftermath,
made intervention necesarv.

it would lead to a rapid resolution
of the crisis.
IN FACT, mutual withdrawal
was considered a real possibility
only in the public utterances of
the U.S. government. Not a single
Arab state supported the
agreement Arnh nwsnaners.

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan