100%

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

Share

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.

November 25, 1991 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1991-11-25

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

9

Page 4 -The Michigan Daily- Monday, November 25, 1991
0be LiCbgan iailI

420 Maynai Street
Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109
747-2814
Edited and Managed
by Students at the
University of Michigan

ANDREW K. GOTTESMAN
Editor in Chief
STEPHEN HENDERSON
Opinion Editor

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.
:: JJ.V:: :............... rfrr::.:Y. ". :."JJ:: Jrfl:.:'J.:Y: "f:l::.:': ": J:.".":::.::"J::: :: r: Jli':"i:{'i:':':'::':":'i
."::. :::::.','::::.::':::::":r: ........... ..............:::.:"::..... ........f......:l:r. frrr::f:::::flf:. :. '.:':r:::.:Y::;: 'ff :Y: ':: {. :.1 :. . '::.f .. f...f..f..f..f..f...." ........
T'" :...ti:":":"!v:":=?:"Xrii ::: : " .. r.: : :%'r'."' . r. ti{"::: ::4:1::":":"i:":::":":":"5:"'r'.":"'r'::"'r'"r. .
:'r'."j::::
:": 'r'": r:."r."i:"'r'."::i%":":"°. i:":v:": ."i:": :' :: r. ::: ." "r :":::.":.. r ..J ,..... r . r. : "::< :,"':: : :"::};:::}: i:"
:::. :. :.: :. :........... .. ....... r......"... r .. :. : ... :.....: ...........: . /:.::. ,....: f r.":". f...,.... r:.R"f{" :.1..".:."r.:::".":."."."r............... r.....:....:.r ..... . : :" ":: "::..; ..
.r "".
:.: .J. "'J. ":{":":'{': l:::tip ...JJ ".
.:":{ t... . f r r. }:. ::: {':?'::i:: i }i i 1l {{": {':.:"..:. J..'f::: J::::.V:XJr::::.:"r:.:': %.
?4;.' >:{' r r..n.::":": ": rr. /' e.".. . "."r."."rxf .".".".":.".:.".". .". ." v .v: s" :::v.:: :w: :w.
TY f." . r.. v." f.".". .. r ..........................
:%l r
:: ".::'.::":.:':,::".: .:. :.ter.:,:.: 1.:":. r.1':.Vll:::: fi'. :. %:::r '.":'} :".": rJ.:V:'
:.":V f: "::{ f ":ff ": :YJ%. f:.:"J:: Jr: J :":'1fr.. . f: r " " "rJ:: "f.
;:; ::............. l:{{{":\...{r .r.. r.. .J.: .:f ' f:: '}fi:. .f1{' JJ. '. {f.}:S{{'" i:. :;{r };::.;: {.;:.::{':"}::. V'.it: l: i:'::':::":::
!::. r.. Jam.f } .......

No mandate

How A 6bAcrLr4>1T 1-!(- -,
tAN .%i~(~ ~1;FSrocI
~v&N AN bR
HA AHA--.o-

Low voter turnout shows apathy, not support for CC

T he Michigan Student Assembly (MSA) fall
elections have come and gone, and for the
third straight time, the Conservative Coalition
(CC) enjoyed a comfortable victory.
But before the young conservatives pop the
cork on the celebratory champaign, or rush to act
on their "voters' mandate," they ought to look a
little more closely at the election results and what
they really mean.
Admittedly, CC dominated the balloting last
week. The party captured 10 of the 24 assembly
seats available for this election, and retained the
majority status it won last winter. Additionally, the
CC-sponsored referendum to amend automatic
student group recognition into the MSA constitu-
tion passed by a 4-1 margin.
But the incredibly low voter turnout certainly'
puts CC's big win into a smaller perspective. Only
about 6 percent of the total electorate, or 2,073
students, bothered to vote at all in the election.That
number suggests the election results aren't an
"affirmation" of the assembly's current conserva-
tive agenda; by contrast, it speaks strongly of
students' consistent indifference toward MSA.
CC should recognize this, and work harder
-during thenext semester to increase student interest
and participation in the assembly.
Instead of waiting for students to come to MSA,

the assembly must bring itself back to the students.
CC should use its majority to push for things like
a 24-hour library, a bigger student say in the
formation of University policies and other en-
hancements in student services. Students will be
more likely to vote in MSA elections if they see
how the assembly can impact their lives.
The assembly's committees and commissions
can also play a larger part by more vigorously
seeking student involvement in their activities. It
isn't enough just to use student apathy as an excuse
for inaction.
Ironically, CC ran last winter on a platform of
increasing student participation. Then-CC presi-
dential candidate James Green said the assembly
was too removed from the student body, and was
not serving the interests of the "general student."
He promised optimistically to make MSA more
interesting and accessible to students.
But the election results suggest Green has done
little to move the assembly toward that goal. The
"general student" still doesn't care about MSA.
Hopefully, CC will not mistake the election
results as a sign of sweeping support forits platform
and agenda; that can only lead to more of the same
in terms of student indifference. The conservatives
should instead be disturbed by the shamefully low
turnout, and act to correct it.

01

Research
University's ranking in spending shows neglect for students

T he University Administration displayed a
T genuine pride when Vice President of Re-
search William Kelly announced that the Univer-
sity ranked first among state schools in research
spending. Among all schools, the University, which
spent $310.6 million, ranked third, behind the
Johns Hopkins University and the Massachusetts
Institute of Technology. Certainly, the University
should feel pride in its role as a leader in gathering
knowledge and information. But, the tremendous
amounts of revenue spent on research demon-
strates the University's neglect of its undergradu-
ates.
The bulk of research revenue comes from out-
side the University. In fiscal year 1990, members
of the University faculty received, for example,
$109 million from Health and Human Services,
$25 million from the National Science Founda-
tion, and $400,000 from the National Endowment
of the Arts. All told, the federal government granteda
the University $182 million in FY1990. Sponsors
also include the state, industries, and foundations.
The fact that the University receives so much
money, which is not used directly to improve
undergraduate education, relegates undergradu-
ates to a lower priority. Last year, the University
spent $42 million of its own money on research.
With approximately 24,000 undergraduates, each
paying between $10,000 and $20,000 tuition, $42
:m illion is a considerable percentage of the revenue
generated from annual tuition payments. Forty
million dollars would supply thousands of students

with generous scholarships.
Prioritizing spending isn't the Universities only
problem. Students need to start asking exactly who
is spending this $300 million of research grants. In
many cases, their professors are busying themselves
with research, rather than teaching and advising.
The job description of a professorship should make
clear that teaching and being available to students
every semester is of more importance than inves-
tigation.
But, because the University has become a na-
tional institute for research, professors take sab-
baticals, or spend semesters or whole years re-
searching, rather than imparting their knowledge
onto the University's student population.
The question of social responsibility in choos-
ing to accept research funds needs also to be
addressed. In 1990, the University spent $13 mil-
lion of the Defense Department's money. The
University should not be selling its precious human
and scientific resources to conduct research for the
federal government, which will inevitably use the
results to construct additions to a growing military
arsenal.
The discovery of the cystic fibrosis gene and the
recent development of a method to synthetically
generate bone marrow are badges of honor that the
University deserves to wear proudly. But, the ad-
ministration and its scientific community owe it to
its lifeblood - the undergraduate population - to
concentrate University resources on teaching, not
research.

Free-market art
To the Daily:
The article "Offensive
proposal," (10/31/91) discusses
Jesse Helm's attempt to cut funds
to the National Endowment for
the ARts because of its presenta-
tion of obscene art. The contro-
versy resulting from his actions
clearly depicts the problem with
government-sponsored art in
general.
By funding an art work, the
government endorses the opinions
the art expresses, denouncing
anything. If the art endorses
Christianity, for example, the
government makes a statement
against all other religions and
philosophical doctrines.
People often say that the
reason art should be federally
funded is that much art would not
exist otherwise. With this "logic"
it would be just as valid to fund
putting thimbles in space because
they would not exist there
otherwise. All art funding should
be based on free enterprise or it
misrepresents the individuals the
government should serve.
Peter J. Schweinsberg
Music School sophomore
More on the ad
To the Daily:
I was told that one shouldn't
argue the content of articles like
Bradley Smith's, since in their
minds, arguments lend credibility
to their statements. This is true.
However, after reading Bradley
Smith's letter in the Daily, I was
outraged. I had to remind myself
that one should never debate
history with a madman (especially
one whose initials, as one student
pointed out, spell B.S.)
How can anyone debate
history? You can debate the
causes, or the details, but never
the event itself. Bradley Smith
and his fellow Revisionists
obviously think they can just
ignore historical fact. I can't, and
neither can any decent, sane,
feeling, intelligent person - a
description which does not apply
to Bradley Smith or his cohorts.
Inasmuch as I agree with
Bradley Smith's statement that an
ad should not be censored just
because some people find it
offensive, I do not agree with his
manipulation of First Amendment
rights and his playing upon other
people's beliefs to justify his
iniquitous garbage. We are not
discussing an ad about abortion,
homosexuality, PC, or any of the
other topics heavily debated on
campus and-all over the world.
We are discussing a historical
event.
As for the Daily, I am as yet
undecided about their political
correctness and journalistic ethics
in printing this ad. Their position
could have been clearer, and they
could have communicated better
with their business staff. An-ad
like this, cloaked as it is in false
respectability, could appeal to
many bigots out there. However,
the Daily's choice may have a
beneficial effect in that it will
allow students on campus, and
people the world over, to recog-
nize people like Smith for what
they are: bigots and liars.
Kristin Johnson

this situation has awakened the
nation's awareness of the horrors
of AIDS.
However, throughout all the
articles and conferences with, by,
and about him, Magic does not
seem to have gained much
wisdom from this experience. He
is continually expounding the
virtues of "safe, protected sex."
But in scouring the pages of the
news day after day, I have yet to
hear him mention abstinence
once.
Such a one-sided exhortation
is, quite frankly, unnerving and
saddening. The moral issue aside,
I had hoped that Magic Johnson
and all his fans would have
learned a priceless lesson from all
this: the only truly "safe sex" is
abstinence before marriage and a
monogamous marital relationship.
Howard Scully
Business School junior
Who is Marcellus?
To the Daily:
Recently, there has been a lot
of controversy surrounding the
printing of the CODOH ad. In the
Daily, an article was printed in
Insight signed by Thomas
Marcellus, who is simply identi-
fied as director of the Institute for
Historical Review. Naturally,
after reading Marcellus' defense
of the ad, I wondered exactly
what the Institute is.
The Daily did not identify it,
but I came a cross a reference to it
in the latest issue of Newsweek,
in an article about David Duke. It
reads, "During this period Duke
attended meetings at the Institute
for Historical Review, a Carto-
funded operation that underwrites
scholarship to disprove the
Holocaust." My question is, why
was this information (aboutswhat
the Institute is) not made clear in
The Daily?
Jacob Rome
Engineering sophomore
Women's rugby
To the Daily:
On Oct. 21, the front page of
the Daily had two photos. One
was from the U-M varsity football
game. It was of a clean, intelli-
gible moment of the game, when
the players looked intent, focused,
and in control. The other photo
was of a sorority rugby game in
the Mudbowl.
The photo was of a chaotic,
unintelligible moment of the
game; the players looked ineffec-
tive and scattered. The players
look more like erotic mud
wrestlers than rugby players.
The male fantasy implicit in a
group of women playing in the
mud makes them simply players
of that fantasy. They are not
threatening. Strong, aggressive
women working together as a
team are threatening. Thus the
juxtaposition of photos on the
front page; thus the Mudbowl
game rather than an official rugby
game.
This is not to pass judgement
on the women who were in-
volved. Rather, my point is that
the only way a women's team
makes it onto the front page of the
Daily is by titillating the male
taste. The U-M Women's Rugby
Football Club is ranked fifth
among the nation's collegiate
teams. We have, as of Oct. 28,
huln r,nrn o ;n .the Thnall

thousand times more than is
possible in a pick up Mud game.
Sandra Potter
President, U-M
Women's
Rugby Football Club
Where's the SRC?
To the Daily:
It seems to me that in any
community, local, state, national,
international, or otherwise, it
should be the goal of the members
of that community to coexist as
freely and peacefully as possible.
I define "as freely and peacefully
as possible" as meaning "with as
few regulations and acts of
enforcement of these regulations
as possible." Therefore, each act
of enforcement - for whatever
reason - is a step backwards
from the long-term goals of a
community and an indicator of the
inability of the community to
coexist without using force.
Four recent events seem to
shout to the University commu-
nity that it is taking large steps
backwards: the use of tear gas by
" the city police to disperse a crowd
of university students, the
restriction of access to the
Michigan Union, and, twice, the
use of deadly weapons by
university police officers. What
bothers me so much is not the fact
that these tools of force were
employed to maintain order, but
that they are not seen for what
they are. While force is some-
times a necessary last resort, the
city and university administra-
tions and the MSA are acting as if
they are blind to the fact that these
actions are significant contribu-
tions to the disintegration of this
community's ability to exist as
freely and as peacefully as
possible.
It is these bodies' responsibil-
ity to aggressively investigate
these incidents and use their
resources to promote an environ-
ment where this type of force
simply is not required - they
seem to have forgotten this
(where the hell is the Students'
Rights Commission?). It is vital
that the use of force is recognized
not as a mode of operation, but as
the pathology it is, and as such, an
obstacle to moving forward as a
community.
Carsten Hohnke
LSA junior
Apology no good
To the Daily:
Your last page ad (10/25/91)
alleging that the Holocaust never
took place was one of the most
horrendous articles I have ever
read.
What happened to six million
innocent people? Did they vanish
into thin air? No, Sirs, they were
gassed, tortured, shot, burned and
buried alive - 80 of them, my
family. My late father was an
alumnus of the University of
Michigan and would indeed have
turned over in his grave, had he
read that page. No apology can
suffice for such ignorance and bad
taste from what was once consid-
ered one of the finest Universities
in this country.
. Unfortunately, there is an
editor who has not yet learned

0

AIDS testing
Mandatory testing for AIDS ineffective and unfair

0

T he fear of contracting AIDS is no longer
confined to people practicing unsafe sex or
drug users. It has also spread to the health care
community. Although a way of calming this fear
must be found, mandatory AIDS testing is a vio- 1
lation of a person's right to privacy and is not a
solution to the problem. However, voluntary AIDS
testing on the part of patients is a way of limiting
the fears of health care workers and improving the
level of care that each patient receives.
One step to simplify the testing process would
be the simplification of consent forms for patients
who want to undergo HIV testing. Amore expedient
process would make it easier for patients to submit
to these tests. This is a measure that the American
:Medical Association (AMA) has been calling for
over the past several months. Unfortunately, the
AMA has been making little progress.
c Those who do not wish to be tested must recon-
cile with the fact that they will be treated by health
care workers as though they do have AIDS. Because
there is the unknown factor of whether or not the

patient has AIDS, health care workers will have to
take the greatest amount of precaution necessary
instead of the least. In this way, the patient maintains
his privacy, and the care-giver takes steps to insure
his safety just in case.
Such a precaution, which seems to be of sig-
nifitant direct benefit to health care workers, is
regularly ignored by many care-givers.
In a survey of hospitals across the United States,
only half of them treat patients who decline AIDS
testing as though they have AIDS. This irrespon-
sible attitude creates an environment much more
conducive to the transmission of the HIV virus to
health care workers.
Due to such flagrant disregards of safety mea-
sures, there is a need for regular inspections of
health care facilities to ensure that proper safety
procedures are followed.
Voluntary testing on the part of patients would
save patients and healthcare workers a lot of grief.
Doctors will know what precautions to take. No
infringement of personal privacy is necessary.

Nuts and Bolts
O.K. KIOS,-M.ANK&IVIN&
l)Nt LOVE THIS HouDJAY,
BUTT- .Sn LL 7-H)NK( -THAT We
SNOUL> STA7M LWHAT A~
TK,flJLo. xK? A . Y

(,ooMYt,.R(

(N

by Judd Winick
gR ooo
'PARDP- NaRDA ,
POO PAAWP. ue
. _ :'PA A A

I

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan