4

OPINION
Page 4 Thursday, March 14, 1985 The Michigan Daily

Edie nd b t hUn a n
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

Sufering in the steel industri

Vol. XCV, No. 128

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

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

Neglected opportunity

THE MICHIGAN Student Assembly
missed out on a good opportunity
to network with other student gover-
nments across the country when they
voted down funding for two members
to attend a national student lobbying
day in Washington D.C.
On Tuesday night, the assembly
denied representatives Kevin
Michaels' and Mark Williams' $363.25
request to cover expenses for a lobbying
day sponsored by the United States
Student Association.
USSA is an organization of student
governments from across the country.
Its intent is to work for much needed
inter-collegiate cooperation and the
lobbying day, according to Michaels, is
one of its two most important events.
Such cooperation strengthens student
input by providing a unified student
voice.
Several MSA representatives ex-
pressed doubt that the two lobbyists
would be able to accomplish much.
Anne Ryan, one of the more vocal op-
ponents of the funding, called for the
money instead to be spent on a letter
writing campaign, which she argues
would be a more effective way of
fighting cutbacks in student aid.
There is some question as to whether
two student lobbyists would have a
significant impact on legislators, but
the spirit is that in addition to the lob-
bying they would be able to do, they

would be strengthening ties with other
student governments across the coun-
try-that surely was a bargain at $363.
The arguement that VISA should use
the funds to finance a letter writing
campaign rings hollow, however.
Michaels and Williams could have set
up a booth in the fishbowl as proposed
by MSA president Scott Page to gather
student postcards which they would
carry to Washington rather than mail.
Such a delivery would have been
equally effective as a letter-writing
campaign and would have allowed for
the lobbying as well.
Also, Ryan herself mentioned that
there had not been a letter writing
campaign on campus yet, even though
the assembly has been aware of im-
minent funding cuts for many months.
Tuesday's discussion gave no in-
dication than any such campaign
would materialize.
Additionally, MSA was being asked
to fund only half of the trip as Vice
President for Academic Affairs Billy
Frye had already authorized his office
to match whatever MSA allocated.
While there are some doubts as to the
effectiveness of such a lobbying
mission, the benefits from working in
conjunction with other student gover-
nments make the proposal worthwhile.
In denying funds for the trip without
offering a viable alternative, MSA has
neglected a valuable opportunity.

By Ann O'Brien
and Christine van Rgenan
Second in a series
The hardships resulting from layoffs in the
steel industry have been well publicized
throughout the 1980s.eMassive unemployment
in steel towns has focused the nation's atten-
tion on the decline of one of the U.S.
economy's primary manufacturing in-
dustries.
The decline of the steel industry may be at-
tributed to several factors. First, the demand
Industrial Economic Development
A^Three Part Series
for steel has declined significantly in the past
decade. There are many reasons for this.
The automobile industry, one of the largest
steel consuming industries, has geared
production toward smaller, more compact
autos. Second, the U.S. economy is shifting
into service and high-technology industries
which use little steel. Finally, American steel
companies face increasing competition from
not only Japan, but also developing countries
such as Brazil and Korea who have modern
O'Brien and van Reenan are graduate
students at the Institute of Public Policy
Studies. O'Brien is the steel seminar chair
and van Reenan is the conference chair at
the Industrial Economic Development
Conference on March 14 and 15.

equipment and cheaper labor.
Despite the hard times, U.S. steel
producers maintain the U.S. steel industry
can regain its historical position. Industry
leaders believe restrictions on imported steel
will give them the breathing space necessary
to modernize aging facilities and become
more competitive. But, some experts
disagree. For example, Robert Crandall of
the Brookings Institution, believes that with
or without import quotas, "the decline of the
integrated industry is irreversible." Cran-
dall's view has led to the development of
smaller scale steel production in
technologically advanced "mini-mills."
Mini-mills melt scrap steel in electric fur-
naces, thus avoiding the high overhead costs
of raw material steel mills.
While mini-mills with scaled-down capacity
may yield more profits for steel producers, it
spells trouble for steel workers. Numerous
plants have been closed and in many regions
of the country thousands of unemployed steel
workers and blocks of abandoned plants are
commonplace.
Does government have the responsibility of
keeping the steel undustry afloat in these
communities? And, if government does have
this responsibility, does government have the
ability to do it correctly?
The hardship felt in these communities has
prompted the creation of a number of activist
groups which maintain that the massive
unemployment in certain steel regions is not
only unfortunate, but unnecessary. In the Pit-
tsburgh area, once the center of the American
steel industry, several church/labor unions
have become increasingly outspoken and con-
troversial.
The Denominational Ministry Strategy
(DMS), an organization founded by
Protestant ministers, blames the state's
severe economic problems on the Mellon
Bank and the U.S. Steel Corporation for
refusing to invest in the area.
Another union based in Pittsburgh is the

Tri-State Conference on Steel. Headed by the
Reverend Garrett Dorsey, this organization
has a specific plan to save depressed steel
areas in Pennsylvania. Tri-State claims that
the U.S. Steel Corporation is abandoning
profitable steel mills just because profit
levels are too low to meet rates of returns
available elsewhere. Tri-State claims' that
this is unfair and that the government should
intervene. This is because the costs of the
community are too great. In their plan, the
government would help create a Steel Valley
Authority (SVA) to produce steel. The SVA's
steel would be produced in acquired aban-
donded steel mills.
The basic premise is that the community is
unduly suffering .from a steel industry 4
pullout. By having the government produce
steel at a low, yet profitable rate of return, the
community would be better off.
The steel industry and the steel communities
are at odds. While the communities are
fighting off the suffering of job displacement
and transition, the industry is fighting for its
best utilization of capital. The economy is in
the balance.
In a long-term perspective, the economy
might be better off if the community's steel
industry was allowed to die. However, this'-
phasing out of the steel industry would cause
another problem: How fast of a phase-out is
too fast?
The steel debate is a very divisive issue. On
one side, the corporation is trying to abandon
the community because of low or negative
profit margins. On another side, the com-
munity is all but crushed by the removal of a
large income base. The government is in a
position that affects both the industry's and
the community's fate. And, yet, what is the.
right decision? A dynamic economy is based
on the notion that some industries die while
others flourish. How much suffering is too
much?
Tomorrow: A look at enterprise zones.

i

Wasserman

S~OME ?eoLe o&IcT
To IMtY VoINW&
Dt ?90",

It rc 'T~WtV. IT
WILL'TARNISVA
N\~i ?UFLIC

IM~c

Nkl.."

N-

r
4

I
a

Talking versus doing

I

' R '

WIM
OF.O." PW6

I

N TUESDAY, nearly three hours
of what U.S. arms negotiator Max
Kapleman calls "serious and
businesslike discussion" opened the
Geneva conference between the Soviet
Union and the United States.
For the first time in 15 months, the
superpowers are "bringing their
bargaining chips to the table and
aiming to achieve understandings if
not formal agreements regarding
nuclear proliferation.
The U.S. State Department has
specifically expressed a desire to seek
an agreement regarding strategic of-
fensive nuclear arms, intermediate
range nuclear forces (INF), and
defense and space arms issues. A State
Department bulletin says, "The U.S.
seeks radical reduction in the numbers
and destructive power of strategic for-
ces and is prepared to explore tradeof-
fs that would accommodate the dif-
ferences in the two sides."
These are admirable and ambitious
aims, but the statement resonates with
a rhetoric pervasive in official U.S.
articulation of arms control and
disarmament policy. As so many of the
statements made during United
Nations special sessions on- arms con-
trol and previous arms negotiations
sessions, however, the reality is often
that U.S. actions fall far from the
rhetoric.

The U.S. is not alone in its lack of
commitment to serious negotiations;
the Soviets are equally guilty. It is im-
portant, however, to approach the
current talks with a realization of U~S.
failures and with the hope that. the
Soviets have become aware of theirs.
The Geneva talks shouldn't be just
another "missed opportunity" under-
scoring the futility characteristic of so
many arms negotiations sessions
before.
With enough commitment to the
ideals advanced in the State Depar-
tment's brief on the talks, substantial
gains might be made this week in
Geneva.
Instead of insincerity and empty
promises there is hope that some non-
proliferation agreements will be
initiated; but initiation is not enough.
Unfortunately, the United States and
Soviets seemed inclined in the past to
bargain and shake hands just in time to
run home and build some more
weapons. If not, INF hardware, perhaps
they'll build the machinery of "Star
Wars" of the next brilliant
"peacekeeping weapons 'that
technologists might suggest.
Talking is a good first step toward
action, but it is only a first step. It's
time now not simply to talk about cur-
bing the arms race, but to actually stop
it.

SUT REALLY/ TRIG
t; oTE
TOR k& RE AK

i
r }
/
"
c .
,,
r
0

MEN~d COULDuSEL
THEIR IwtG~1- F&r A1-I
MAILLION BUcLLC\

e

'v
r
2
T
.
Cif
(.."
1 V

4

Letters
Story neglected TAs who like to teach'

To the Daily:
That certainly was a nice pic-
ture you ran of me on the cover of
Weekend (March 8). My gran-
dmother thanks you. But the fine
photography cannot make up for
the quality of the article, "TAs: A
prof's equal?"
I will be restrained in my
comments on Sean Jackson's ar-
ticle. After all, students have the
right to criticize their instructors,
not just quietly but publicly and
loudly. Students must use
publications such as the Daily to
challenge- the quality of the
education they are receiving.
Even criticism that is unfair may
do some good. An article im-
plying that most Teaching
Assistants don't teach well may

students become TAs is to sup-
port themselves.
Many graduate students love to
teach. We entered doctoral
programs to obtain credentials
which will permit us to teach for
the rest of our lives. Enthusiastic,
eager to teach, we seized upon
the Teaching Assistantships of-
fered to us. The pay has been
poor, but the students we get to
teach have been wonderful. I
know these feelings are shared by
many of my colleagues in the In-
troductory Composition
program.
Your article uses photographs
BLOOM COUNTY

only of TAs in the intro comp
program. Are the article's
criticisms, directed at TAs in
general, intended to apply to us?
-The article complains about lack
of training for TAs, but TAs in the
comp program participate in
training seminars throughout
their first year. Many continue to
study the teaching of com-
position, in classes offered on
that subject or through in-
dividual, supervised reading
lists.
The article implies that the
foreign-born TAs in all the depar-
tments have trouble com-

municating in English with their
students. The foreign-born TAs
who teach English compostition
speak and write the language
fluently and with expertise.
TAs get high ratings from
faculty, your article states, but it
neglects to mention that many
TAs in the comp program receiv1
high ratings from students.
hope that some students will
respond to the article with their
own letters.
-Jan Armon
March 10
by Berke Breathed


1EAVORARY. lAT (.5T THAT
Me w Id/If] pr~'AAo

AAOiw 7. MMJA~T4IA

86T I71MOf COW eIN
1*L3 t'ItLKIW W W5, 7VE
SW ILL EM .Off AND3P4

MI/I) %&*go.m

- - - 1

16

r