I OPINION Page 4 Wednesday, April 3, 1985 The Michigan Daily Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan MSA does serve students A Vol. XCV, No. 145 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Editorials represent a majority opinion of the Daily's Editorial Board Empty talk FOR THE first time in 15 years, Ann Arbor will be controlled by the Democratic party. Monday's elec- tion saw all five of the incumbent council members retain their seats, but Democrat Ed Pierce defeated Republican Richard Hadler in the mayoral contest. Although the Council proper remains deadlocked with five representatives from each party, the mayor's .vote gives the Democrats the majority. The last 15 years under the Republicans have seen rapid growth in the city that has displaced many of the lower income residents and has changed the very character of the city. The population has grown dramatically, putting demands on available housing, and economic ex- pansion has increased the value of un- developed property. Hadler campaigned with the intent of maintaining the direction the city has taken under the current mayor, Lou Belcher. Belcher, who chose not to run for reelection, has encouraged downtown development without ad- dressing the need for housing construc- tion elsewhere. The Democrats on the other hand have been calling for additional low to moderate housing for some time. Now that they have a majority on Council, they should begin to act on some of their proposals. Lowell Peterson, representative from the first ward, has proposed a building permit policy which would require all downtown development to provide housing projects elsewhere. Although an indiscrimiante linking of downtown development to housing projects may be harmful to the Ann Arbor community in the long run, the proposal demonstrates an important concern that will surely be acted upon during the next year. Another of Pierce's proposals is the establishment of an entertainment tax that 'would shift the current burden from property owners to patrons of the city's entertainment offerings. In prin- ciple the tax would be imposed upon events that attract visitors from out of town, but in practice it threatens to add additional expense for students, who already pay a great deal of tax to the city when the University uses some of their tuition to pay for some city services With control of City Council, the Democrats are in a position to im- plement many of the reforms that are long overdue in low income housing.. Their overall vision for the city is a welcome change from the Republican agenda, but their specific changes will have to be carefully monitored to in- sure that businesses are not stifled and that student concerns are upheld. Editor's note: Two weeks ago Kevin Michaels wrote an editorial declaring that the Michigan Student Assembly had "skewed priorities. " ("MSA has skewed priorities, "Daily, March 21) The respon- ses to the editorial came in two forms: criticisms and support of his philosophical stance and criticisms or en- dorsements of his candidacy for MSA president. In order to maintain the philosophical debate over the nature of MSA, we are running a series of editorials reflecting diverse viewpoints on the issue. We encourage letters endorsing any of the candidates in the upcoming MSA elec- tion, however, we cannot guarantee publication. By Steve Kaplan Recently, the Michigan Student Assembly was attacked for our "skewed priorities" (Daily, March 21). In this opinion, Kevin Michaels painted an inaccurate and incom- plete picture of MSA. For example, Michaels bases the claim that "MSA has a poor image on campus which promotes student apathy towards the assembly and a lack of respect from the University Administration" on in- nuendo, half-truths and twisted facts. MSA's productivity is directly related to the level of student participation in University issues. If students are unwilling to get in- volved with a project or event, then that project or event never materializes. The assembly's image cannot be responsible for the low level of student participation. Many or most students would rather study, party and sleep than become involved in campus issues. It is extremely naive to think that improving the image of student government would cause these students to suddenly participate: these students do not even care what MSA's image is. Students who are interested in campus issues are also the ones who areunlikely, to remain on the sidelines because they do not like the image of student government. In fact, most of these students participate because they are concerned and motivated to change the way things are, regardless of any student government. In short, the level of student in- volvement in MSA is not a direct function of MSA's image. It has much more to do with the everyday reality of student life on campus: grades, finances, personal relationships, Kaplan is the vice-president of the Michigan Student Assembly. career interests, and competing ex- tracurricular commitments. Michaels declares that students "see a student government out of control." In fact, MSA is running wild, this year and every year, offering students more services and projects to get involved with than ever before. MSA continues to offer group health insuran- ce and group property insurance at a lower cost than individual insurance. MSA distributes over $20,000 each year to student groups who sponsor or produce worthwhile educational or cultural programs and events. In addition to monetary awards to student groups, we offer groups the opportunity to advertise free their existence in a campus wide publication, the Guide to Student Organizations. MSA also facilitates student groups through the bakesales and infor- mation tables in the Fishbowl and MLB, by allocating office space for groups in the Michigan Union and Michigan League and by centrally scheduling the campus film groups. We are responsible for finding individual students to represent the entire student body on University-wide committees. MSA spon- sors a free income tax assistance program in our offices. MSA is responsible for publishing the Course Evaluations booklet and the MSA News. MSA supports the efforts of inter- national students on campus to provide a more personal atmosphere on campus. We have initiated an annual Housing Fair which gives students the opportunity to contact lan- dlords in a central place. These are the services that MSA provides for students on campus. The typical student seldom realizes that the Michigan Student Assembly is responsible for all these services. Nonetheless, each year thousands of students are in one way or another affected by our ser- vices. What MSA projects or events do students notice? During last year's national Presidential election, MSA invited both Presidential candidates to campus. One of the invitations was accepted, and over 10,000 heard Walter Mondale. MSA was not required to offer these invitations. We made it one of our important "priorities" for students to have the opportunity to see the candidates in person. Maybe the dollar in postage and paper could have been better spent on "cam- pus issues". Some of MSA's important campus priorities that Michaels' analysis ignored have had the greatest impact on student life. MSA's Women Issues Committee brought to the forefront of public attention during a day long . meeting with the Vice President for Student Services. Why did Michaels not comment on the historic event that provided the impetus for the eventual implementation of an escort service-which Michaels endorses as if it were not already planned-and a more com- prehensive proposal to improve campus safety and the attitude of the University towards such crimes against women? Since 1970, the University has stated a goal of 10 percent black enrollment. 15 years later, the goal has not been met. MSA has fought for the information and support necessary to achieve the University's stated goal. MSA has made it a priority to inform the students of the University's progress. We have filed Freedom of Information Act requests on students' behalf to bring about a greater un- derstanding of minority issues. There is nothing "subjective" about "educating" students for the purpose of rectifying racial discrimination. MSA, through its "skewed priorities", educated the entire campus, faculty and students alike, about the University's plan to implement a code of nonacademic conduct. The information MSA distributed on the code helped students evaluate and understand the code on their own. While some of that infor- mation distributed could be considered "sub- jective", it is important to realize that MSA's postion on the code is based on a campus-wide student referendum and on the positions taken by student leaders. A more "objective" treatment of the code was the MSA sponsored code forum with President Shapiro. Over 400 people, including two regents and several high-level administrators attended. The students in attendance sent a message to the administration that the code was unaccep- table. As a result of MSA's "priority", the Administration sent the entire code back to committee. Do not forget that MSA is nothing more than a group of student volunteers committed to serving students' needs and addressing im- portant student issues. We are not professionals able to offer 40 hour weeks to student concerns. MSA is not perfect. Regret- fully, MSA makes mistakes, even blunders. These occurrences are usually front page news. It is unfortunate that some cannot look beyond these errors to see MSA's greater good. As unpaid, overworked students who also must study, do homework and eventually plan for employment or education, we do the best we can. Our only reward, and the only reward we should receive, is the satisfaction of knowing student interests are served. MSA's priorities are students' priorities because we are students, funded by students and elected by students. But participation does not start with being elected. For any student on campus with an important concern, project or event, MSA can provide the means for its realization. Nor should participation end with elections. To claim that MSA's priorities are skewed is a misrepresentation of the facts born out of purely personal and political motivation. A new direction T HAS BEEN exactly six weeks sin- ce the Iranian linked terrorist group Islamic Holy War sentenced one of4 their American kidnap victims to death. Since then, more kidnappings have occured and the situation has developed into one much like Carter faced when the hostages were being held in Tehran. Yesterday, George, Schultz issued an, ambiguous statement that execution of any of the current American hostages would cause the United States to take actions in which Iran would suffer serious consequences. Somehow, it seems as if these hollow threats have all been made before. It reminds one of the little kid on the block telling the neighborhood bully that if he didn't get his football back the bully would be in "real trouble." To this the bully always laughed, knowing that the kid had told him this time and again and never had the courage to do anything but call him a few names and run away. Consistent with precedent, National Security Advisor Robert McFarlane stated that the United States would not be explicit as to what action it would take in response to the possible executions of its hostages. McFarlane claimed that the element of surprise was an advantage which must not be relinquished. It unfortunately seems as if the United States doesn't have anything up its sleeve, but rather is buttressing its hollow threats with intentionally am- biguous and unspecific answers in a false attempt to sound serious. To be sure, McFarlane actually did go on to make a very intelligent statement in which he elaborated that, "If we do not use those forces where their use is clearly justified, we get neither the direct benefits nor the deterrent value of having such forces in the first place." The United States is long overdue to take action against acts of terrorism. Admittedly, striking back at the right people is the hardest part of the task, but the world's strongest country has been held hostage too long. It would be a belated and pleasant surprise to find that there is more than just emptiness behind this country's latest retaliatory threats, and that, with a little more ac- tion, the United States might be able to prevent its citizens abroad from being abducted or executed. Letters Editorial took dangerous viewpoint To the Daily: The MUM Party Candidate for President, Kevin Michaels, wrote an opinion entitled "MSA: Skewed priorities" (Daily, Mar- ch 21). This article is disturbing for at least one reason: Michaels' vision of the role of student governnent in university affairs is misguided and dangerous. Michaels's main point was that MSA should not be in the business of educating students. On the con- trary, it is the responsibility of students' elected representatives to keep their constituencies in the various schools and colleges in- formed on university and educational issues. Students can act on and react to those issues in an intelligent and responsible manner only if they are familiar with the issues. In fact, one of the main reasons students are at a disadvantage vis-a-vis the university ad- ministration and the faculty when participating in university decision making is students' lack of knowledge on university and education issues. Hence, educating the student body is one of the fundamental services MSA provides. Supposedly, Michaels would let the administration tell us all we need to know about the proposed code or sexual assault on cam- pus. This overlooks the fact that one of the major reasons we do not have a code now is because MSA spent considerable time and effort making sure students know about the code. (Michaels, not surprisingly, voted against spen- ding MSA money on posters in- forming students about how a code would be approved.) Similarly, it would be naive to rely on the administration to publicize sexual assault on cam- pus when it considers such ac- tivity a nnhli ral atinm nrnhlpn entirely too subjective." To restate Michaels'tgeneral argument, studenits should receive no student government sponsored education at all because that education would be too subjective., To be honest, I have no idea what an "objective" education would consist of; the first thing each freshperson learns at this university-assuming he or she had not realized it earler-is that everything he or she reads or hears comes from a particular perspective. Students are thus constantly faced with a choice: they can either passively accept how their instructors and univer- sity administrators frame issues or they can supplement those perspectives with their own. MSA has historically chosen to facilitate the latter. Through its funding of student sponsored projects; periodicals and events; and its own education campaigns; MSA has assisted students who wish to be heard. MSA has not been and should not be mum when students want help voicing their opinions and concerns. Is there another reason Michaels objects to student spon- .sored educational forums, literature and projects? Michaels also claimed in his article that student sponsored education is too liberal. He thus objects to all student government sponsored education on a philosophical level, i.e. because it is too biased towards students' perspectives. Michaels also objects on political grounds because he believes his own right-wing beliefs are not shared by most of the students. Under the guise of "objectivity" Michaels is trying to advance his own political program. -Eric Schnauferl March 27 Author could learn from his nemesis To the Daily: I was disturbed by Brian Leiter's somewhat incoherent ar- ticle "Lessons of a Decadent Age" (Tues., March 26th). It was not clear whether the point, was sincerely to bemoan the peren- nial "decline of intellectual stan- dards" or to use that overworked cliche as a springboard for a facile attack on Reaganism. If the latter, then Mr. Leiter could apparently learn a few "lessons" of his own from his presidential nemesis. Reagan, at least, knows his constituency, and is unfor- tunately quite successful in tran- slating his outrageous and dim- witted comments into broad, grass roots political support. Leiter, on the other hand, not only fails to make an effective popular appeal against Reaganism, but also squanders an opportunity to BLOOM COUNTY display the "critical assessment" he so prides himself on. He just tells an "anecdote" of his own, but it is spoiled by a tone of smug elitism. But suppose the article is to be taken at its face value and Leiter' really intends to decry the lost cultural virtues of bygone days? If so, he has plenty of Conser- vative company. Indeed, this is one charge often coming from the Reagan camp that demands closer scrutiny: "Why is it that in our age of -modern technology, mass media, widespread literacy, and relative prosperity we seem to produce fewer master pieces and fewer geniuses?" It is most likely an illusion. After all, as the past recedes we keep acknowledging and discovering new heroes of culture who rival their predecessors. Leiter cannot. seriously believe it has been downhill from Pericles and Sophocles-he even himself has kind words- for the "post- Renaissance West" and apparen- tly admires Foucault-so I would like to know his favorite century. But even if it were for moment admitted that democracy and "mass society" have somehow diluted desirable cultural values, it would only be a sign of the most distorted ethical priorities to wish to revert to the "good old days" on those groun- ds. In the final analysis, there is a troublesome tension between Leiter's hostility to Reagan's reactionary politics on one hand, and his own reactionary cultural perspectives on the other. -Adam R. Bernstein March 27 by Berke Breathed - - I A tN, ( f~j ITq .~ 1wM M W 5 i S1R! n% Our Ir AF -M5 AWAf i ®M 1 . cIftk. lic w Az '"A '1t 1 t M2 J4TI~ I V£WW4 ii"Iuj~r 3l M 1ACL' iMff~lX .s iha' I