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


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.

April 15, 1986 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1986-04-15

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



Page 4

Tuesday, April 15, 1986

The Michigan Daily


r w r
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan
Vol. XCVI, No. 133 420 Maynard St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board
All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily.


years a
fgaught with
iinty. Eve
their intelleo
they feel
together, for
or business
grid disjointe
Along with
students con
from advisor
make decisi
"Law schoo
becomes 1
pressure pus
to making h;
for the wrong
The propos
of the Blue R
help to comb
The commis
program. cal
that will off
thinking and
: The progr
$ages. First,
small andt
form, givi
teract with
pity's senior
w P :

Critical thought-
4Y LSA students, their intimate setting. Second, the cour-
t the University are ses would be interdisciplinary and
confusion and uncer- provide an opportunity for
n while challenging knowledge from different subject
ct and their beliefs, areas to be tied together. Some of
a need to tie the the suggestions for the courses
gained in courses themselves seem vague, but cour-
unlike the engineering ses on the knowledge and power of
curriculum, the LSA words, and on conflicting historical
may seem haphazard interpretations (Daily, 4/10/86)
d. would help students critically
examine information delivered to
h the lack of cohesion, them in other courses and maybe
nstantly feel pressure even help them decide on a field of
rs, family, and peers to study.
ons abot their future. The courses as proposed are
1 or Medical school?' recommended but not required, but
the question most the suspicion is that the com-
asked. This sort of mission would eventually like to
;hes many students in- see a certain number of the courses
asty career decisions, made into requirements. While this
g reasons. would provide for a consistent
sals that have come out university education, most studen-
ibbon Commission will ts probably would frown at another
'at these two problems. requirement to fill in order to
sion, after 4 years of graduate.
g, recommends a The estimated cost of the
lled SKILL (Skill and programswould be $2-4 million
in Lifetime Learning) dollars, not an exhorbitant sum.
fer courses in critical The money would come from en-
I analysis by the fall of dowments or from individual
departments who might lose one
am has many advan- course to this program, such
the courses would be sacrifices are undoubtedly worth-
taught in a seminar while. The Blue Ribbon Com-
ing freshman and mission deserves applause for
the opportunity to in- recommendations that can only
some of the Univer- improve the quality of a university
faculty members in an liberal arts education.
rogress is process.

5 t.Tjbes£t4'
1{++ J

l 17

_ _ _ _ _. .nmm u ue nw-- _



U don't solicit more defense dollars

( HIEF of Staff Jefferey
Zuckerman, Reagan's
#ominee for Equal Opportunity
dommision, general counsel, has
said that blacks and women can
overcome discrimination by
working for lower wages than other
employees. This contradictory
statement reflects a commonly
held belief that women and
iiinorities don't deserve equal pay
;or equal work.
Civil Rights legislation was enac-
ted to ensuere against unfair wage
Cates and other kinds of
discrimination because people will
tolerate inhumane conditions to
earn money. Historically, women
and minorities have been
segregated into lower level job
categories and poverty. Though
women have made incredible gains
in the last 20 years as members of
an increasingly mixed gender
workforce, both women and
minorities still constitute the
majority of part-time, unemployed
and discouraged workers.
Clearly, equal opportunity and
pay legislation need more vigorous
attention, not less. In 1983, 79 per-
cent of 16.9 million clerical workers
and 97 percent of 4.9 million
secretaries were women. Seventy
percent of retail and personnel
sales workers compared to 32 per-

cent of managers, administrators
and executives are women. By
fighting for equal opportunity and
pay legislation, women and
minorities have progressed since
1976. In that year, 1.6 percent of
scientists and engineers were
blacks and nine percent were
women. By 1983, these statistics
had cahnged to 2.3 percent and 13
percent respectively.
A laisse-faire approach at this
point will result in regression and
stagnation of opportunity. Last
Year, the EEOC stopped con-
sidering time table guidelines for
goal achievements in employer
discrimination settlements. The
Justice Department intimates that
supervisors should not be respon-
sible for employee and sexual
misconduct if the company has "an
expressed policy against sexual
harassment and a procedure
designed to resolve sexual
harrassment claims.'
These recent revisions prove that
women and minorities have not
made sacrosanct gains. Progress
toward equal employment oppor-
tunities is a continuing process.
Rather than challenging
discrimination, Zuckerman ex-
cuses it. This insensitivity and lack
of understanding have shown him
to be an unacceptable candidate for
general counsel to the EEOC.

To the Daily:
I read with interest the
editorial, "Declassify Research"
(Daily, 4/3/86) and the several
previous articles on this subject.
The discussions now underway
by the Committee on Classified
Research Policy are very impor-
tant and I am pleased to see the
evidence of continuing student in-
terest in this matter.
What concerns me, however, is'
that the Daily articles have in-
cluded some misstatements of
fact and some incomplete
descriptions of the review of
potentially classified projects.
The result is an unfortunate
misrepresentation which could
lead to exaggeration of differen-
ces, rather than the building of
consensus in the campus com-
In particular, I have been sur-
prised to read, first in Mara
Silverman's article on February
10th and subsequently in a March
7th article by Dean Baker and in
the recent editorial, the
statement that the University
administration has a "commit-
ment" to bring in more Depar-
tment of Defense dollars. The ar-
ticles base their recommen-
dations for handling classified
research at least in part on fears
that the extent of the University's
involvement in classified resear-
ch will grow because of an
alleged commitment to increase
the University's acceptance of
DOD dollars.
I know of no such University
administration commitment to
increase the fraction of DOD
dollars here; as Vice President
for Research, I would certainly
expect to be aware of any such
The recent editorial also
described reviews, one in 1980
and one more recent, in which the
participation of the student
member of the Classified Review
Panel appeared not to conform to
the Regents Bylaw. The 1980
case actualy occurred during the
summer of 1981, despite special
effort on the part of staff in the
Office of Vice President for
Research, the student member
could not be reached in time. He
had left the campus without
leaving a forwarding address.
(The student eventually did
receive the mailing and did ap-
prove the proposal, although
Since the Michigan Student
Assembly appoints the student
members to the Classified
Review Panel and the Research
Policies Committee with terms
ending April 30th, and MSA has

In the second example (1985),
the particular project was not a
research project undertaken on
the campus, but an annual con-
ference of long-standing, conduc-
ted elsewhere, under the leader-
ship of a University faculty
member. The Department of
Defense was late in sending the
contract renewal documents,
which unexpectedly included a
form specifying the classification
status. Since the nature of the
project remained unchanged
from prior years, the conference
was allowed to continue. But the
classified research review was
undertaken as soon as the
University learned that a review

was needed. This example also
occurred during the summer, and
again, no student member had
been named by MSA. So, the
prior year's student (who was no
longer registered) was asked by
my office to participate.
Finally, it should be noted that
careful review of classified
projects by the faculty/student
panel over the last five fiscal
years lead to approval of nine dif-
ferent projects which permitted
"receipt and generation of
classified materials." Three
projects which permitted "ac-
cess only" to classified infor-
mation were also approved. Yet
no classified reprts have ac-

tually resulted from any of these
projects. Indeed, the last
classified report generated at
The University was more than
ten years ago, in 1975. (That
project was approved by the
panel because the sponsor made
clear that, even if a classified
report were generated under the
contract, the researchers were
nonetheless encouraged to
publish the scientific results of
their work in the open literature.)
I hope this information will be
of assisstance as the campus
community and the committee
address this important matter.
Linda S. Wilson
April 9


Many groups help the apartheid march

To the Daily:
While I appreciate the
coverage the Daily gave to
the April 4 march against racism
and apartheid, there was at least
one major inaccuracy reported
which must be clarified. The
march and rally,Fwere not
organized by the Free South
Africa Coordinating Committee.
Yes, FSACC was one of the prin-
cipal groups involved, however,
the entire two weeks of action
leading up to the march were
planned by a coalition of campus
organizations and individuals. As
was mentioned at Friday's rally
and in previous literature, the
planning committee for the two
weeks of action included: the
University's Black Student
Union, Washtenaw County
Coalition Against Apartheid, In-
ternational Possibilities
Unlimited, Black Law Student
Alliance, Black Greek Associaton
and FSACC. Members of the
AMISTRAD Construction
Brigade, and the Latin American
Solidarity Committee were also
very helpful and more than 20
other campus groups actually
endorsed the event and helped
with publicity and fundraising.
Without this coalition effort it is
doubtful the march would have
been as successful as it.was.
The march itself was testimony
to the diversity of forces that
guaranteed its success. Men and
women, students and faculty,
black and white, people of dif-
ferent generations, ethnicities,
and cultural and religious
backgrounds, united with com-
munity residents to march
through the streets of Ann Arbor
to express condemnation of
racism and apartheid. No one
organization or handful of in-
dividuals could have guaranteed

numerous to name, but they
should all be reminded of the
words of our sister, South African
activist Winnie Mandela who
said, on behalf of her people, "We
will be free one day and when we
are we shall remember who our

friends were. . . We have long
memories." A Luta Continua...
-Barbara Ransby
Free S. Africa
Coordinating Committee

Misrepresented opinion

To the Daily:
On your campus in 1972 I gave
my first public lecture. Since
then I have returned many times
and have given hundreds of lec-
tures throughout the country.
Never have my remarks been so
thoroughly distorted as in the ar-
ticle, "Hunger Expert says
Mistrust of Nicaragua is Misin-
formed," (Daily, 32/28/86).
Ironically, your paper's
coverage of my talk on Central
America is an object lesson in a
major theme of that lecture -
widespread media misrepresen-
tation of the reality in Central
America, particularly in
I did not defend human rights
violations or press censorship in
Nicaragua. On the surface, such
a charge is absurd: One might
deny but who would defend
human rights violations?! I did
neither. I said that human rights
and violations and press censor-
ship represent limitations on
freedom and democracy in
Nicaragua. I added that in con-
trast to life in several other Cen-
tral American countries, in
Nicaragua one feels among the
people no widespread fear of the
army and police; abuses there do
not represent state-sanctioned
terrorism, as in El Salvador and
Guatemala where military of-
ficers go unpunished for literally
thousands of civilian deaths.
Virtulno1ennne fthe diecnt

demonstrated that it was not a
You refer to a "New Yorker
Book Review." There is no such
thing. I referred to The New
York Review of Books' article
containing gross distortions
about Nicaragua.
Reading your article I was both
outraged and saddened. Besides
the above inaccuracies, the
reporter missed the theme of my
entire talk: If we can learn to put
ourselves in the shoes of the
hungry in Central America, we
will discover that the profound
changes necessary to end hunger
there are in our own interest as
well as theirs.
Whether by intent or ineptitude
I do not know, but you have un-
dercut my own efforts - and the
efforts of many dedicated studen-
ts and community people who
sponsored my visit to Ann Arbor
- to bring balance and reason to
a discussion of Central America.
Frances Moore-Lappe
March 29
To the Daily:
The current practice of taping
notices for meetings to campus
sidewalks provides for in-
teresting observations about U of
M students. First, the lack of
regard for the environment is ap-
parent. Soon after the notices area

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan