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.

October 08, 1986 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1986-10-08

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


Page 4 Wednesday, October 8, 1986 The Michigan Daily


4,E t figan UtIQ
Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan
Vol. XCV!I, No. 25 420 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.






' I l t


, ,
ยข.: ,
. .

Bringing home

Inn -V

Ann Arbor man in West Quad is an
example of neglected social
responsibility. Many people these
days have.a sentimental view of the
homeless, as long as they're out of
sight, or at least out of reach.
Though the gripes of particular
residents of the Quad are valid in
that the man was stealing stereo
equipment, money, and clothes,
the approach that was taken seems
unnecessarily harsh. The residents
of West Quad, afterall, have
options that the homeless man does
not have. They have education,
and access to information which
they could have shared with him.
Did they approach the man? Did
they inform him that there is
another warm place to sleep in Ann
Arbor? Did they explain that the
Salvation Army gives people
clothes? Did they direct him
toward a place where he could get
free meals? Generally, if people
are stealing it is because they have
run out of options. If people are
living in dorm lounges, it is
because they have nowhere to stay;
if they are wearing another
person's clothing, it is because
they don't have any of their own.
Needless to say, they don't have
access to laundry facilities, either.
Apparently, it is not uncommon
for homeless people to be picked
up by police for trespassing on
University property. Recently, a
homeless man was sentenced to 30
days in jail for trespassing on
University property. He was using
a University bathroom.
The ugly reality of the homeless
plight in this country is that 35.
million U.S. residents are
homeless. In Washtenaw county,.
s:there are 450 homeless. The two
homeless facilities here can sleep a
maximum of 97, and that's beyond
legal capacity. Where do the
homeless go? They're on the
streets, in the woods, and
occasionally, in University
residence halls.
The Ann Arbor City Council



has succeeded in promoting a
single room occupancy
development downtown.The
Community Mental Health
organization has now agreed to
lease two places for low income
housing. Unfortunately, even this
will not correct the problem.While
general assistance allocated through
the Department of Social Services
grants needy folks $163 for rent,
which must include heat and
electricity, most Ann Arbor
residents would agree that this sum
is insufficient. Indeed, the average
rent for Ann Arbor housing is $350
per month.
Aside from the problem of
inadequate affordable housing,
people are homeless because of
high unemployment. Even
minimum wage employers want an
address and phone number where
they can get in touch with
applicants. The Division Place,
which is the day shelter in Ann
Arbor, is supposed to provide its
guests with this service, but when
employers call, they become upset.
They don't want homeless people
working for them, and landlords
don't want to rent to homeless
people either.
Another reason for home-
lessness is mental and physical
disability. Many homeless people
have been misdiagnosed in mental
institutions such as Northville and
Ypsilanti State hospital. Though
state funded adult foster care
homes for disabled people do exist,
it is difficult to find quality centers.
In Ypsilanti this summer, three
homes, all owned by one Tan,
were closed down because the
caretakers weren't feeding the
people or keeping the houses in
good physical condition.
As students, and concerned'
community members, it is possible
to have an impact. The homeless
shelters here in Ann Arbor need
volunteers; as Pete Seeger once
said about where to go to change
the world, "Stay right where you
are. Don't run away. Dig in."

You '



Lot i





V1F71 -



r 7i'1 " i.

. .. .




Rucknagelfails to justify code

To the Daily:
Professor Donald Rucknagel's
editorial, "University Needs a
Code," (Daily 10/1/86) is
perhaps the most enlightened
argument in favor of the Code
yet presented. Therefore, its
utter failure to establish its point
is one of the clearest cases ever
for why the University does not
need a code of non-academic
As long-time chair of
University Council, Rucknagel
is one of the central figures in
the code issue. In the two years
he has worked with Council to
draft an alternative to the
administration s code proposals,
he has surelybeen exposed to
the minutest details of the issue.
Yet for all his experience, he
remains as vague in his defense
of a code as Virginia Nordby and
William Colburn were two years
He begins his defense by
recounting the strategy adopted
by the Council in early 1985.
He writes, "We arrived at a list
of problems that fell into three
categories..." Although he was a
part of that process, Rucknagel
seems to have forgotten what
actually happened. There was no
list of problems, because the
council could not discover any
pressing problems that required
additional intra-University legis -
lation. The list Rucknagel is
speaking of consisted only of
theoretical problems; problems
that might plague the
University, but have not so far.
The clear- proof of his
confusion is that in the course of
his lengthy article he never
mentions a specific instance
where a code would have made
the University a safer or better
place. In this failure he is
certainly not alone; no ad-
ministrator in the last three years
has been able to do so in spite of
constant pressure from students.
But Rucknagel's argument is
more enlightened than most
because it is amongst the first to
seriously examine the claim that
the University is a community
apart from the rest of society and
ought therefore to have its own
rules. He expresses a sincere
desire to avoid students' having
to go "downtown" to settle their
grievances in favor of the
"loving guidance" the University
might be able to provide.
The University is a special

need for some form of
punishment in any society, the
University community's needs
are adequately filled by the
existing justice system.
In calling for a University
justice system that largely
duplicates the effects of the
system at large, Rucknagel
claims to be working on behalf
of the entire University
While few who have worked
with him would question his
integrity, Rucknagel seems
entirely unable to comprehend
the student view of the situation.
Throughout his article, there
runs the consistent (probably
unconscious) theme of a
benevolent institution. He be -
trays this theme first in citing
standard and abnormal psycho -
logical factors that necessarily
trouble the community and later
in his call for "loving guidance"
for wayward students.
To students who consistently
find themselves unable to
register for the classes they
want, who find residence hall

authorities progressively re -
stricting their freedom to
entertain in their dorm homes,
and who find an administration
and Board of Regents unwilling
to listen to any number of
complaints, the notion of a
benevolent institution is a myth.
Clearly, there are countless
wonderful opportunities at the
University, but those oppor-
tunities can sometimes appear to
exist in spite of the admin-
Therefore, Rucknagel is
unable to understand student
objection to the code because he
cannot see how students
necessarily feel about the
University. He cannot offer a
philosophical justification for a
code when he doesn't understand
the philosophical objections to
Nobly, Rucknagel claims he,
"is as commited to political
dissent as any student on this
campus." Nevertheless, he
seems unable to imagine how
difficult it is for a student to
express that dissent under any

circumstances. Even without
the presence of a code, students
are necessarily intimidated by
faculty members and a
bureaucracy shrouded adminis-
tration. With a code, student
would be further inclined toward
silence by the knowledge that
the University sat as judge and
court system of their non-
academic lives.
In his inability to provide
either practical or philosophical
justification for a cose,
Rucknagel merely proves what
students have been claiming for
three years: there is no need for a
code. While Rucknagel con-
cludes his letier with an
optimistic call to continue the
work of the University Council,
he mistakes agreement 'to
continue that work with
agreement in the need forit.
Perhaps, when he and the
Council come to discuss
questions of civil disobedience
he too will come to see how
hollow his well-intentioned
defense sounds. -Joseph Kraus
October 4

Uniforms and guns aren't protection


Research policy 1I

classified research guidelines for
the University, the ad hoc
committee which reviewed the
current guidelines left out a very
important rule: the caveat against
classified research with uses
potentially harmful to human life.
The adoption of the proposed
guidelines without the "end-use"
clause would be a serious breach of
the University's responsibility to
itself and to society.
The committee's reasoning for
omitting an end use clause is
fallacious. The proposed policy
forbids the generation of classified
material under all but
"extraordinary circumstances." The
committee'says this iule makes the
end-use clause is unnecessary.
While this may be true of classified
research (again, under all but
"extraordinary circumstances"), it
is not true for unclassified

Regents rejected the proposal.
While the committee certainly
had good intentions in trying to
clean up the ambiguous language
of the current guidelines,
sacrificing the University's values
for the sake of convenience is not
acceptable. Researchers do have a
right to explore their fields of
interest, but not at the University
when the community has so
vehemently objected to
research-of any kind-potentially
harmful to human beings.
Under the current system for
reviewing classified research, two
committees and several individuals
look at each project for conformity
to the guidelines on a case-by-case
basis. Thus, though the current
end-use guideline is somewhat
open-ended, it also allows for
flexibility for each individual
project. The same or a similar
system would keep that flexibility,
iAthnut comnrnmising nmmumiti,

To the Daily:
Uniforms (and guns) do not
protect our right to complain,
(Daily, 9/16/86). I am
protecting the right to
complain when I complain.
What you and soldiers
everywhere usually do is
protect the wealth and power of
the ruling class.
Just what is the evidence
that soldiers have any interest
in my rights? Since WWII,
U.S. soldiers have killed
hundreds of thousands of Third
World people (i.e. nonwhites)
on their own soil. These
people were not invading the
United States, attacking me or
any of my rights. Ask
yourself why people with next
to nothing on this earth are
such a threat to us that our
soldiers kill them. But don't
kid yourself that you are
killing these people for me.
One of your own said it
"I spent 33 years and four
months in active service as a
member of our country's most
agile military force-the
Marine Corps. I served in all
commissioned ranks from a
second lieutenant to Major

revenues in...I helped purify
Nicaragua for the international
banking house of Brown
Brothers in 1909-12... I
helped make Honduras 'right'
for American fruit companies'
in 1903..."
U.S. Major General Smedley
D. Butler,

Common Sense, 1935
I didn't write that history of
the United States, but I can
read it. That's why I'i
-Karen Klitz
September 20

Baker represents student interests

To the Daily:
With regard to your article
"Pursell defends financial aid
stance" (10/3), I am sorry if
our campaign literature led
anyone to misunderstand
Pursell's votes to cut student
loans. I didn't mean to imply
that he had singled out student
loans as a program to be cut.
He has also voted to cut
finding for education in
general, as well as funding for
social security, medicare,
nutrition programs, job
training, and many other
domestic programs.
At the same time Pursell has
supported enormous increases
in military spending, hundreds
of millions of dollars in aid to
the Contras, and corporate tax

particularly persecuted that
Pursell has voted to cut their
financial aid while voting for
record federal budget deficits.
However, I'm not sure that this
will provide much comfort to
those who are unable to afford
a college education.
Because Pursell has alienated
such a broad range of his
constituency on so many
issues, we have hundreds of
volunteers working very hard
on this campaign. If you
would like to help us elect
someone who will represent
our interests, please call us at
747-8211 any time of the day
or evening.
-Dean Baker
-Democratic candidate
ffor Cnnress

Back to Top

© 2024 Regents of the University of Michigan