OPINION

Page 4


Tuesday, April 9, 1985

The Michigan Daily



e aIdu gan a n
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan

Letes officers announce endorsementsE

Vol. XCV, No. 150

420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109

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

Vote yes on C

ROPOSAL C on the Michigan
Student Assembly ballot in
today's election asks students whether
a code of non-academic conduct should
be approved by the entire student body
rather than simply by the assembly.
Although such a 'proposal seems to
diminish MSA's authority, is is an im-
portant safeguard in preventing an un-
fair code form being established at the
University.
The Proposed Code of Non-Academic
Conduct was first revealed last year
and was originally to have been im-
plemented by the beginning of this
school year, but student protests -- and
MSA's objections - delayed it.
The code has gone through sub-
sequent revisions, the most recent of
which saw it dubbed "The Rules of the
University Community Revision -1."
Although the Rules would theoretically,
apply equally to faculty, staff, and

students, students would be the most
affected.
Students would still face potential
"double jeopardy" situations in which
the less formal University court could
find them guilty of charges
simultaneously brought against them
in civil court. Additionally, the Rules
could still be ammended without the
approval of MSA. Therefore, once they
were passed, students would lose all
power to influence them.
Under Proposal C, students would be
guaranteed the right to review any
code of non-academic conduct before
MSA approved it. Therefore even if
MSA were to change its position on the
code, students would be assured of
having a voice in the decision making.
In order to guarantee student input in
a code of non-academic conduct, vote
yes on proposal A in today and
tomorrow's MSA elections.

Stick with basics

C OLLEGES AND universities, long
bastions of esoteric learning and
research, are in danger of becoming
almost as commercial as the business
community. In an effort to revive the
state's and the University's
economies, legislators, developers,
and university leaders are suggesting
an expanded University ties to
business as a remedy for statewide and
University budget woes.
Proponents of the trend, like Gov.
James Blanchard and Regent Neal
Nielsen (R-Brighton), contend that a
move toward more contractual
research for the private sector would
significantly increase University
revenues, which would be used to help
make up for inadequate state support.
They further argue that universities
can be a tool for encouraging growth,
and they point to institutions like the
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
in Cambridge, Mass. as examples of
how a university can affect a region's
economy.
Unfortunately, these visions are
unrealistic and potentially dangerous.
In the first place, the amount of
revenue a university can take in from

business related activities is ex-
tremely limited. There is simply not
a great deal of research that cor-
porations need but are unable to do
themselves.
But more importantly, a major ex-
pansion of the amount of contractural
research at the university carries the
risk of subordinating University in-
terests to corporate interests. If the
University begins to rely heavily on
corporate gifts, grants, and contracts,
it may find itself ignoring the basic
research that forms the core of the
research community.
Basic research is central to the in-
tellectual nature of the University
because it takes on problems that can-
not be applied immediately to
pragmatic business concerns. In the
long run, however, basic reseach leads
to important scientific breakthroughs.
All this does not mean that a Univer-
sity should not help contribute to
economic growth. Indeed, universities
already help in that area by educating
students and researching problems.
But to expand that researching role by
leaps and bounds undermines the very
institution it purports to protect.

To the Daily:
On Tuesday and Wednesday
April 9 and 10 MSA will be holding
its annual elections. Undoub-
tedly, the most important of all
the races is the contest for
president and vice president.
Three sets of candidates will be
out shaking hands, handing out
literature, and kissing babies
during the next two days. Alex
Diana and Casey Whitehead from
MOVE (Make Our Vote Effec-
tive), Kevin Michaels and
Thomas G. Salvi from MUM
(Moderates at the University of
Michigan), and Paul Josephson
and Mickey Feusse from VOICE
(Voicing Our Concern in
Education) will actively be
soliciting your votes. We would-
encourage all students, including
our fellow graduating seniors, to
explore the issues and to cast an
informed vote.
During our year at the helm of
MSA we have learned a great
deal about the inner workings of
this large University. We
discovered the great potential for
MSA and have tried to use its
resources and its influence to af-
fect change for students. We have
placed a tremendous amount of.
emphasis on making MSA a
responsible, vital student gover-
nment. Therefore, it is with the
utmost concern that we approach
the issue of our endorsement for
the next MSA President and the
future of MSA.
After interviewing the can-
didates, reading their stances in
the MSA News, reading the
Daily's account of the campaign
and, most importantly, working
directly with two of the can-
didates throughout the year, we
have come to a unanimous
decision that Paul Josephson is
the best choice for MSA
President.
Alex Diana and Casey
Whitehead from MOVE have
some very good ideas about how
to change MSA. We have a great
deal of personal respect for Alex.
He deserves praise for his efforts
in this campaign. However, Alex
simply does not understand the
complexity of the issues, much
less the University. If Alex were
to spend a year working at MSA
or in a campus organization more
exposed to the workings of the
University, he would be a much
stronger candidate. The jump
from dormsgovernment to MSA is
not impossible, but certainly im-
probable, and seeing that the two
other candidates have a year's
experience in MSA, he simply
cannot bring the sophistication
and maturity of either Paul or
Kevin.
Thenreal decision as to whom
you should vote for is between
Kevin Michaels and Paul
Josephson. We strongly feel that
Paul is a much stronger can-
didate for many reasons. First,
while both Kevin and Paul have
worked with the assembly this
year, Paul's involvement has
been much deeper. He has spent
more time in the office learning
the inner workings of MSA. He
understands the day to day
operation of the office much bet-
ter than Kevin. Kevin has spent
much of his time representing the
students on the state and national
level. While this is important, it
simply does not impact the
students on this campus very
significantly. MSA's involvement
in MCC and in USSA, our state
and national student governmen-
ts, should be continued. However

they should not detract from
MSA's issue oriented work on
campus.
Second, Paul's leadership skills
are more properly suited for the
effective management of the
assembly. Admittedly Kevin is a
very dynamic and strong
spokesperson to those who sup-
port his causes, but MSA is not a
homogeneous body. While Kevin
has impressively voiced his con-
cerns throughout the year at
meetings, he has not effectively
voiced them. He has created
enemies within the assembly and
has not exhibited the ability to
calm people through his speech
and actions, vital skills for a
student body president.
Paul Josephson will be both
impressive and effective in
presenting his views. He under-
stands that diversity and poten-
tially volatile nature of MSA.
MSA demands and needs a leader
who can understand the

To the Daily:
Paul Josephson, the presiden-
tial nominee of the VOICE party,
is clearly the best candidate for
MSA. At the April 3 Campus Meet
the Press, he displayed excellent
leadership qualities and exten-
sive knowledge and understan-
ding of campus issues. Moreover,
we have spoken to all three can-
didates and have evaluated their
positions printed in MSA News.
Because of his leadership
qualities, experience, and
responsible attitude towards the
priorities of MSA, he is our choice
for MSA president.
Josephson has concrete and
realistic goals. Among his main
priorities is alleviating the
problems facing - minority
recruitment and retention. While
his opponents, Alex Diana and
Kevin Michaels, waffled on the
issue and had no clear ideas,
Josephson stated a clear and
comprehensive plan calling for
the centralization of the Univer-
sity's recruitment and retention
efforts.,Easier access to support
programs will undoubtedly help
to lower the unacceptable at-
trition rate. Also, while
Josephson recognizes that much
of the focus is on the enrollment
and retention of blacks, he also
addresses the problems of other
minorities which should not be
overlooked.
Women's issues are a top
priority of all three candidates,
yet Josephson and his party can
offer the most experience as
they have been dealing exten-
sively with the administration on
this issue. He understands the
necessity of increased campus
security and realizes that action
from the University ad-
ministration is needed to improve
campus security.
Kevin Michaels seems to think
that if the administration will not
cooperate, MSA can solve this
problem on its own. While
Michaels commitment to this
cause is admirable, it is difficult
to understand his lack of con-
fidence in dealing with the Ad-
ministration on this issue. In or-
der for campus security to be im-
proved to the extent that his
needed, MSA must have support
from the administration.
Josephson has the necessary con-
fidence and will work for im-
proved campus lighting, a 24-
hour crisis hotline,hadditional
legal services, and educational
programs. He also advocates a
professionally staffed centralized
rape prevention center.
All the candidates agree that
the "Rules of the University
Community" (the Code) is unac-
ceptable in its present form. As a
member of the MSA students'
rights committee, Josephson has
the most experience with the in-
ner workings of the Code. Alex
Diana stated that the Code is at a
"standstill:" Apparently, he is
unaware that the Code is curren-
tly in the hands of the University
Council, a committee composed
of both students and faculty.
Josephson was the only candidate
to point out that the students still
need to be educated about the
Code. Many students are
unaware of the Code's current
status and educating students is
vital to gaining student support.
Josephson also has a clear,
well-defined, and rational policy
BLOOM COUNTY

on funding and supporting
student organizations. While
campus issues should have
priority with MSA, world issues
should not be ignored as if
University students are immune
to them. While Kevin Michaels
would not fund anything dealing
with larger issues, Paul
Josephson would have a policy of
funding events dealing with these
issues. Josephson would ensure
that the minor amount spent on
funding such events would repre-
sent diverse points of view. His
position on fundng student
organizationsshows that he will
keep larger issues in mind, but he
will keep them in proper perspec-
tive. Clearly, Josephson has the
most responsible and moderate

his slate is unmatched in terms of
MSA experience and proven
committment to student interest.
Paul will not allow MSA to stray.
from its stated purpose of serving
students, and he will be a strong
proactive leader. More importan-
tly, he will listen to the advice of
fellow assembly members and

use amply forethought before
making a committment to any
specific policy or stance.
All three candidates deserve
praise for their efforts during the
campaign. The quality and level
of debate on student issues will
significantly contribute to MSA's
overall effectiveness next year.

A VOICE for minorities

To the Daily:
I am herewith making the
following endorsement on behalf
of the Recruitment, Retention
and Graduation Project of the
Michigan Student Assembly. It is
based upon a review of the can-
didate's statements in the MSA
(April 5, 1985) their presentations
at Campus Meet the Press (April
3, 1985) and the articles that have
appeared in the Michigan Daily
(March-April). Additignally, only
one of the candidates for.
president and vice president has
requested information or presen-
tations on the issues that are af-
fectingrrecruitment, retention
and graduation of minority
students at the University from
the research project: Paul
Josephson and Mickey Feusse.
Josephson/Feusse and the
VOICE party receive my con-
sidered support and earnest en-
couragement for the following
reasons:
* VOJCE candidates under the
leadership of Josephson/Feusse
forward a more realistic and less
gullible view of the University
organization and its relationship
to the larger society. VOICE
seems to more clearly under-
stand the range of responses that
,students must consider and often
implement to advance their in-
terest in the interaction with the
regents, administrators, faculty,
and staff at the University. Each
of those groups does have dif-
ferent and competing interests at
varioustimes.
" Josephson has demonstrated

support to increasing the number
of minority students that are
recruited, retained, and
graduated from the UniversitN
over the length of my service to
MSA. He gave support and con-
structive criticism as the editor
of the MSA News, supported the
research project when we made
presentations to the University
regents by attending and helping
in the planning of those presen
tations. An examination of his,
statements indicates that he is
the only presidential candidate
that has forwarded practical and
meaningful suggestions on thi
recruitment issue that are based
on an understanding of the
charnges and the facts rather
than superficial perceptions
based on misinformation.
" The Josephson/Feusse and
VOICE party have received the
support of the leaders of impor-
tant organizations in the minority
community (i.e., Black Student
Union, Alpha Phi Alpha and theE
Council of Hispanic Concerns in
Higher Education).
H Most importantly, the ex-
perience of the candidates that
Josephson and Feusse have
brought together under the'
VOICE party will translate into a
very competent and effective
student government in 1985-86.
- Roderick K. Linzie
April
Linzie is MSA 's minority
recruitment researcher.

- Steve Kaplan
Scott Page
April 7
Kaplan is the current vice
president of MSA and Page is
the current president.

LSA-SG presents its endorsements

policy in dealing with this issue.
Unlike Kevin Michael's skewed
priorities, and unlike Alex
Diana's inexperience, Paul
Josephson has a responsible
agenda for MSA and the ex-
perience to carry oul his agenda.
He has the leadership abilities to
be a strong advocate of student.
interests with University ad-
ministration. LSA Student
Government supports him as the
presidential candidate in the
MSA elections. He deserves your
vote.
- Michelle Tear
April
Tear is president of LSA
student government.

Endorsements clarified

To the Daily:
LSA-SG and the current MSA
President and Vice President,
Scott Page and Steve Kaplan,
have endorsed Paul Josephson
and Mickey Feusse as their
choice for president' and vice
president of MSA. We did not,
however, endorse the entire par-
ty. It has come to our attention
that certain VOICE posters
misleadingly state that we endor-

sed the entire slate. We decided
not to endorse an entire party
because we believe that studen
should vote for the best repres e
tatives regardless of their party
affiliation.
- Scott E. Page
Michelle Tear
Page is MSA president and
Tear is LSA-SG president.

Vote today

R EMEMBER, today is the first day
of the Michigan Student Assem-
bly elections. It is essential that all
students take part by voting because
the larger the turnout, the more
credibility MSA earns from the ad-
ministration.
The Daily has made the following
endorsements:
. Paul Josephson and Micky Feusse
for president and vice president of the
assembly
* Jim Dworman for the graduate
position on the Board for Student
Publications
" Jim Boyd for the undergraduate
position on the Board for Student

Publications
" "Yes" on ballot proposal A polling
students on whether MSA should con-
tinue to fund Student Legal Services,
the Ann Arbor Tenants Union, AD-
VICE, and its own operations
' "Yes" on ballot proposal B asking
students whether they would like to
have all mandatory fees disclosed on
the tuition waiver
" "Yes" on ballot proposal C asking
whether a code of non-academic con-
duct should be approved by the entire
student body rather than by MSA.
Elections continue tomorrow with
polling sites located all over campus
both days.


Letters to the Daily should be typed, triple-
spaced, and signed by the individual authors.
Names will be withheld only in unusual circum-
stances. Letters may be edited for clarity, gram-
mar, and spelling.

0

by Berke Breathed

'i



Z I

rI~II

M~Y FOCUS5 RCHAN&66P .
MY PR/Ofr/A55, 5H/FFP..
MY OKP691Y WOC'P

A PATC WI(F
WO#-PRf f91
O" fl

HE6HRq5

r-

11

q

N

wew i r _ - - ---



519.. I'VE 0BECAME
/NWAv W w'rHA

.d

IN MK 5Hf1 nE PRP6t4106
OF IYtIlF6 HAKE BEEN,
RU'(FFLED BY tOV.-ANP

THE Th6 ANPION5
Of CAN-Y"?

.. , , , ,--- I- --- _ 1 ., a

CAN rw 1

A