4 OPINION Page 4 Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Thursday, January 24, 1985 The Michigan Daily Housing for students' needs 4 Vol. XCV, No. 94 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Covert rights O N TUESDAY, Recruiters from the Central Intelligence Agency gave an encore performance at the Michigan League. This time, however, the audience was not as rambun- ctious-they let the show go on. CIA recruiters, in an attempt to make a presentation to students last Novem- ber, were greeted by a group of angry protesters. The demonstration was significant enough to interfere with CIA interviews with students, and the recruiters were forced off campus. Tuesday's protest, though it did not interfere with the CIA's recruitment efforts, further magnifies the impor- tance of understanding that, while the CIA's presence on campus is offensive, recruiters for the CIA should be allowed the same rights to free speech demanded by the protesters. Like any other organization, the CIA should be afforded the right to come to campus and make a presentation to students. And although it is unfor- tunate that an organization that is of- ten involved in covert and destructive measures chooses to exercize that right, the CIA's return visit may give the University community a chance to raise important questions about the nature of their activities. In their two most recent campus visits, the CIA recruiters decided not to take the time to explain controversial policies. They felt that their rights to free speech and assembly were in- fringed upon by the protest group. But just as activists must respect the rights of recruiters, the CIA must realize that in the open atmosphere for communication that a university provides they too are responsible to hear the presentation of those who op- pose them. The actions of the CIA as an "agent of democracy" are often uncon- scionable. In April of last year, it was discovered that the CIA has secretly mined the harbors and ship- ping lanes of Nicaragua. Last October, evidence was produced that the CIA had written a manual advocating political assassination of certain leftist Nicaraguan officials. These are only recent examples of the CIA's criminal past. But alone they are not valid enough reason for denying the organization access to University students. The CIA is but one of the many organizations who make presentations on campus. Denying this organization the right to address students would be tantamount to barring an individual with a criminal record from speaking on the Diag. It does not matter whether the majority or minority of people in this community oppose the everyday actions of the CIA. Freedom to speak is a right extended to the minority as well as the majority on any given issue. It is true that the philosophy of the CIA is absolutely contrary to the values of free discussion and debate. Its countless violations of human rights and covert operations are proof of that. It is also true that in a univer- sity community, where these values are strictly upheld, organizations such as the CIA have the responsibility to hear the voice of their opposition. But free speech is for everyone-whether they practice covert or overt activities. Students should take any opportunity to voice their opposition, and if the CIA expects its rights to be protected, the recruiters should take the respon- sibility to listen. By Robert Hon igman First in a series offour articles. In 1958, as a senior at the University of Michigan, I did a term paper on student housing entitled "After the Quads Where?" Many of the problems described in that paper still exist and are relevant to present student housing conditions. But the paper itself opened a door into understanding the nature of the University and took me on a journey I'd like to share with the University community. My paper traced the progress of an average student through the housing system of the University. For freshmen, I said, the residence halls were adequate housing, but beyond the freshman year they failed. The reasons for their failure lay in the need to ac- commodate incoming freshmen, so that the of the University population of the residence halls was always more than 50 percent freshman and the tur- nover each year was destabilizing. In ad- dition, the prepaid food system tended to be too institutional in character. Older students need a more flexible food system with a choice of pay-as-you-eat cafeterias and private kitchen facilities-the kind of food system we take for granted in the adult world.. At the other extreme, I argued, off-campus housing was too scattered over a wide geographical area and isolated students, both from each other and from the University community. It demanded that a student have a great deal of social maturity and a well- developed network of friends andasocialcon- tacts-otherwise, the student would be lonely and cut off from some of the real benefits of a University environment. In between these two extremes, I said, is the fraternity and sorority system, but here the housing serves the most socially active and self-confident students-the ones who need help the least. The shy and socially im- mature students are barred from the Greek system by their own handicaps and are poorly equipped as well to face the loneliness and isolation of off-campus housing. Moreover, the Greek system tends to reinforce social and ethnic segregation rather than helping students develop new social relationships. What students needed, I argued, was some form of University housing midway between the regimentation of the residence halls and the freedom and isolation of off-campus housing. This housing, which I called "multi- type," could provide a transition stage for students past their freshmen year who do not wish to be cut off from other students or close proximity to campus. I envisioned a complex of housing containing apartments, single rooms and efficiencies, grouped into self- governing associations. During the preparation of my report, my professor commented that I seemed to want luxury housing for students, but I ex- plained-it wasn't luxury that was important, but rather housing that belonged to students and responded to their needs, a place where they could feel at home. Housing had to in some way belong to students, however poor in quality, because the most sumptuous housing in the world would be inadequate if students felt themselves to be only temporary residen- ts in someone else's housing. Dr. Peter Ostafin, then Director of Student Housing at the University, gave me generous support andconsultation service during the preparation of my report, and he called my attention to two facts which seemed to make it imperative that the University build at least some form of housing in the near future. The first fact was that the University was planning to double its student population, from 21,000 in 1958 to 45,000 by 1970, a little more than a decade. The other fact was that land around main campus was too expensive for more residence hall construction, so that if the new students were to be accommodated, a major housing program would have to be inaugurated on North Campus, where there was ample space. Since land was too expensive for residence halls near main campus, it was obviously too expensive for more private housing-as I knew from my own off-campus experien- ce-so I argued that if the University was to avoid becoming a commuting campus by 1970, it needed to develop a major new housing program for students on North Cam- pus. And of course, I suggested that this new housing be "multi-type" housing. I gave a copy of my report to Dr. Ostafin, with an additional copy to A.M. Eldersveld, Assistant Dean of Men, at their request. Sin- ce the University had already built married student apartments on North Campus for the most mature students at the University, I saw no reason why they shouldn't build apartmen- ts for single students and allow them to enjoy similarly reasonable rental rates. My term paper was an important event in my life. Humans, above all animals, create our own environments. We reshape thei physical landscape, and we provide the social mechanisms and institutions to serve our needs. To understand that a physical en- vironment could be changed and that a housing system, like a pair of ill-fitting clothes could be retailored and redesigned to. fit student needsmore comfortably and rationally, was a great achievement in my life. Looking back, I can see now that I had reached the first level of understanding-that being human isn't submitting to the~needs of a system or judging ourselves by its standards, but rather, we become human by asking why the system can't change to fit our needs, and why the system can't belong to us rather than strangers. Honigman, a University graduate, is an attorney in Sterling Heights. Tomorrow: "A lack of communication" Cramer Ocr0,VI984: b1u N,P UERots DT MorrE oioLS HlE MOTOR ciTY APTRRs wit WdWRSE / 77MAj$ JAI~UAR%19B5: HAPPW CTI4usIASTlc SAN FgAAUSc~O FoOnAI.1. FANGS CELEBRATE qgers SuPERBOWL INl. 4 Nothing is sacred A IN THE MIDST of positive economic news and President Ronald Reagan's $12 million inauguration gala, it is important to remember an ignored segment of society: the poor. One of the greatest failings of Reagan's first termwas the increase in the number of people under the poverty level. Although the economy as a whole was strengthened during the past four years, Reagan's economic recovery was a recovery for the wealthy. Despite trickle-down theories posed by optimistic ad- ministration economists, Reaganomics has had little positive ef- fect on the country's least fortunate. In 1984, the economy grew 6.8 per- cent. It was the highest rate of recovery in 33 years. Nevertheless, it is unconscionable to advocate economic recovery at the the poor. expense of But inauguration should be a time for hope, and as Reagan begins his second term in the oval office, new arms talks between the United States and the Soviet Union have a great potential to be productive. But there are still domestic problems the president must face. The tendency for Reagan policy-makers to sweep poverty under the rug will no longer be effective in coming years. It is important for the nation to reaffirm Lyndon Johnson's commitment to a "war on poverty." If tangible economic recovery is what the administration seeks to provide, they can no longer consider only the welfare of the wealthy. A 14 LETTERS TO THE DAILY Remember the five jailed protesters To the Daily: We would like to take this op- portunity to remind the Daily and the University community of the five Williams International protesters who remain in jail. The protesters began serving an indefinite sentence on December 7, 1984, imposed by presiding judge O'Brien, and they refuse to appeal in order to focus attention on the arms race. At the start of this new year, we must remind ourselves that only wrong with America today? What was so grievously wrong in the 1960s? A non-violent movement eradicated many of the intolerable racial problems. Today, five non-violent protesters urge you and I to over- BLOOM COUNTY come the rhetoric about the arms race and our own apathy in order to help solve this problem. It remains a sad commentary that Judge O'Brien's America has no room for peaceful diversity of opinion. Some may see a distan- ce between the sit-ins of today and the 1960s; although social' progress remains the goal, our own apathy, personal and collec- tive, has increased. -Steven Kaminski John McCarthy January 23 by Berke Breathed .rrurnrit I IAAinn 1 Rg t1/ , W OM ?NRNK YOU. rrrr:t t fLA7 T 'ffJ/IttG1tJ' AA V eAnrtlLDG ClffW ON a - ii 11' f $ S. C b;fir u u&c u -' TAK( N0T1, +b4NP . 711f1_VK--V_.1 C/I i'/ONZ I'm 9