90 Page 4-The Michigan Daily- Tuesday, September 15,1992 Iillor ill (Chief tL/iTH Ti-i& FukS2T HME Fo-0d/ALL &AMEI.. us-r AROUwND THE-- 420 Maynard Street Ann Arbor, Michigan 48109 764 - 0552 MATIIEW D. RENNII Opi1ion Editors YAEL CITRO GEOFFREY EARLE AMITAVA MAZUMDAR Edited and Managed by Students at the University of Michigan Unsigned editorials represent a miajority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Teachers union fighting innovation CoENER', PERHAqPS HANb $',GNAL : /VEVF A' Fa R G-E7 THAT Uf'-1!s IFVEF>' iSPEc7-r c OF HUMA7N EX(ISTENCE. DERoGAToRy ( FOR TM AT F,.-,TIF 7-OuCH OF CJ1-A%( 140 S-vE(RI,.4ES RE- ORAL SEx (F(~op GPPOSING / ,4SC4 lTmss Tr'?E T7c) L-OOK AT THE l- FOR f Rb&TEC T tON FR'om' ERRANT A'l-MA'coW9 PROT crtoNFO SA'Jb 990 FOR USE IN THE CoN Su' '. i Ct1Lt.KEL> EENT - T4N ?HiY 90MaE FANSJ RA aFComE O TS. C 19 1?,? FOR TH E: 7TR UE- 0 0 1K D etroit and Inkster teachers have been on strike for more thhn two weeks, and 170,000 chil- dren are still unable to start school. The major stumbling blocks to renegotiating the contract are the Detroit Federation of Teachers' (DFT) insis- tence on an unreasonable salary increase and its opposition to the liberalized "empowerment" pro- gram, supported by the board of education. Originally, the union asked for a 24-percent salary increase - a hefty sum considering the state's budget woes. Sunday the union balked at the board's offer of a 3-percent increase. Almost as deplorable as the union's abandonment of Detroit- area students is its implacable opposition to em- powerment, a progressive school reform that de- serves a chance. Empowerment allows a team including par- ents, teachers, administrators and students to make broad decisions about school curriculum, person- nel and resource distribution - all on a localized basis. School systems across the country have been experimenting with empowerment, often called site-based management. The idea is to improve education by allowing each school to custom-fit its curriculum to the community. Moreover, empow- ered schools can improve the physical plant of the school, create new incentive programs for student achievement, and even change the length of the school day or week. Furthermore, they can replace. incompetent teachers and bring in outside groups to run seminars and assemblies. Such important policy decisions are now made by the school district or Central Distribution, a highly central- ized bureaucracy that cannot adequately address the particular needs of each school. Although empowerment appears to be an inno- vative and potentially successful tool, the DFT opposes its implementation. The union sees the authority empowered schools have over personnel as a threat to union contracts and job security. Actually, dismissed teachers would not be laid off, but transferred to other school districts. And it is unlikely that empowerment teams (made up of teachers, in part) would use the prerogative to hire outside contractors, except for special programs and skills regular teachers could not provide. Moreover, if a large majority of teachers in a particular school reject empowerment, it cannot take effect. Right now 75 percent of a school's faculty must vote "yes" to empower a school. Originally, the school board wanted to change this to 51 percent, thus streamlining the empowerment process. Since the board conceded this point, it will remain exceedingly difficult to empower a school. Currently there are only 12 empowered schools in the entire school system. Considering the board's decision and the behavior of the DFT, that is not likely to change. RR 6 Aum? MiCCAN DA',ILY '92- /// . ... r_-nrm m rsr+ _ _ _ ____ I -, ".Yiii l L::: li:::. liilii :.":.':.. tt:"t::,1;t;v;" Vote for America To the Daily: Another election of the same old same old. Once again, after a lot of complaint about the deficit, the campaign comes down to costly pandering. Bill Clinton's deficit reduction plan uses the same smoke and mirrors as Reagan and Bush have used for 12 years. There is, quite simply, no way for us to pay for Bill Clinton's promises. George Bush's plan on entitlements is a little more direct and realistic, but he's spending it all on his tax cut. Maybe we could just elect him to be our National Grandpa. The central conflict in economic politics for the last 50 years has been whether to increase incomes or re-distribute them. As of late, we cannot do either, and it isn't because we have bad politicians. America is so far gone now that if a candi- date tells you he will improve your standard of living in the next four years he is lying.1992 is a hopeless case, but not 1996. Eight more years of short termism and myopia will destroy our economy for a generation. University voters, get off your asses and start casting your vote for America and its future, not for yourself and your own selfish present desires. Brian Kalt LSA junior The Daily encourages its read- ers to voice their opinions. All let- ters should be150words orless.All op-ed pieces should not exceed 3,000 characters. Submissions should be typed and mailed to the Michigan Daily, 420Maynard,Ann Arbor, MI48109. Or via MTS: The Michigan Daily, Letters to the Edi- tor. 'U' abandons MCC for politics VI W O N .1: f:1:f fs"V W: 1 t.. . f" . ~. ...: Code: students' rights, responsibilities KNOW YOUR RIGHTS Lately there has been a lot of talk over the new code which the university administration wishes to adopt. Since this code, and for that matter any code, directly affects the life of every student on campus, we thought it important that every student have the opportunity to read the code in full. The code will appear in its entirety over the next few days. Friday, the Daily will be holding its first Issues Forum, where the issue will be... the code. Read it, know it and join the debate. These are your rights. This year, students won't be sending 35 cents each to the Michigan Collegiate Coalition (MCC). At their June meeting, the University Board of Regents eliminated funding for this im- portant organization that lobbies for student inter- ests in Lansing. The reason for the cut: MCC has supported a state constitutional ammendment limiting tuition increases. Although support for the proposed amendment was misguided, basing this decision on politics represents misuse of the regents' au- thority.- The campaign began in May when the admin- istration decided it wanted to cut MCC's funding. Only two days before the June regents' meeting, Vice President for Student Affairs Maureen Hart- ford informed MSA President Ede Fox of the administration's plans, despite the fact that just two years ago students overwhelming voted to. continue student funding of MCC in a campus- wide referendum. Regent Paul Brown (D-Petosky) called MCC's support of the proposed tuition amendment"a fatal mistake." Brown's statement suggests that the regents' decision was a politically motivated one - aimed at punishing MCC'-rather than assess- ing the true value of MCC to students. Students need an independent voice to lobby o the state for friendly legislation, if for no other reason than to balance the heavy lobbying on z behalf of the administration. - In light of the circumstances, here are some possible solutions, some of which MSA is already considering: call for voluntary student donations, to fund MCC; give modestly from MSA's general fund or the $70,000 "rainy-day fund;" or, like most colleges of comoproble size, create a separate student-run organization to lobby on behalf of students in Lansing. *0 Preamble The University of Michigan is dedi- cated to creating a scholarly commu- nity that promotes intellectual inquiry, encourages vigorous discourse, and re- spects individual freedom and dignity. Civility, diversity of opinion and free- dom of expression are all valued as the necessary foundation for ahealthylearn- ing community. All students,regardless of theirrace, ethnicity, gender, religion, sexual ori- entation, creed, national origin, ances- try, age or marital status, are welcome members of this community and are expected to participate in sustaining its values. These basic principles were ex- pressed by the faculty in the statement of the Fundamental Tenets of Member- ship in the University Community, adopted by the Senate Assembly on June 18, 1990. This documentstates: "11 who join the University community gain important rights and privileges and ac- cept equally important responsibilities." It also identifies basic principles under- lying these rights and responsibilities, including free expression, free inquiry, intellectual honesty, and respect for the rights of others. These same principles support students' rights and responsi- bilities at the University. In an era when the development of community is becoming both more dif- ficult and more important to create and sustain, the University of Michigan and its students are committed to maintain- ing an inclusive, academically centered community. The goals of this community in- clude creating an environment that sup- ports learning, protects the freedoms guaranteed by the U. S. Constitution, and assures members of the University community an environment free from violence, intimidation, discrimination and harassment. The responsibility for reaching these goals lies with each member of this academic community. The purposes of this statement are to define the University's expectation of its student members, to identify the standard of student behavior and to ex- plain the actions to be taken if a student, disregards this standard. Section I: Expectation of Students Students accept the rights and re- sponsibilities of membership in the University of Michigan's academic and social community when they matricu- late. As members, each st'udent is ex- pected to respect the rights of others and to work to create an open, intellectually as other citizens. These rights include freedom of expression, press, religion and assem- bly. Freedom of expression, including reasoned dissent and voicing unpopu- lar views, is a valued tradition at the University where students have a long tradition of activism. As members of this community, students have the right to express their own views, but must also take respon- sibility for according the same right to others. Students also have the right to be treated fairly by the University and to be informed of University policies that affect them. Any student who is involved in a behavior resulting in a campusjudicial hearing is entitled to appropriate pro- cedural due process proteetions. Section III: Standards of Behavior Students at the University of Michi- gan are expected to show both within and without the University respect for order, law, personal integrity, and the rights of others. Behavior or situations that may be found in violation of these standards include but are not limited to: - physical assault - stalking - threats of injury or harm sexual harassment - discriminating against an indi- vidual or group in any activity,opportunity, or organi- zation on the basis of race, ethnicity,gender, religion, sexual orientation, creed, national ori- gin ancestry, age or marital sta- tus - harassment that unreasonably in- terferes with an individual's work, educational performance, or living environment - arson - theft - hazing - property damage Section IV: Other Regulations A. The knowing possessionof fire- arms or dangerous weapons by stu- dents on campus or at University spon- sored activities is prohibited, except for authorized academic purposes. B. Unlawful possession, use, or distribution of alcohol or drugs is pro- hibited. Section V: Regents' Bylaw 2.01 The Board of Regents of the Uni- versity of Michigan in R.B. 2.01 has given the President of the University the authority without limitation for "the PROCEDURES FOR RESPONDING TO VIOLATION OF THESE STANDARDS. I. Purposes of the Procedures The University has established these standards and these procedures to pro- tect its educational purpose, to provide for the orderly conduct of its activities, and to safeguard the interests of the University community. These disciplin- ary procedures used by the University are considered part of its educational process and reflect the philosophy of peer education and evaluation. Hear- ings or appeals conducted as a part of this process are not courts of law and they are not subject to many of the rules of civil or criminal hearings. Because some of the violations of these stan- dards are also violations of law, students may be accountable to both civil au- thorities and to the University for their actions. Disciplinary action at the Uni- versity will normally proceed not with- standing any civil or criminal proceed- ing. II. Filing Complaints Those filing complaints under these standards may bring either informal or formal complaints to the Office of the Vice President for Student Affairs, in the Fleming Building. A judicial advi- sor, located within theOfficeof the Vice President for Student Affairs, adminis- ters the procedures and guidelines of these standards. III. Informal Mechanisms The University believes that a strong system of informal mediation of dis- putes will encourage reporting andreso- lution of complaints. To ensure that these standards are applied with a proper regard to their goals and purposes, such mediation should occur solely through or at the direction of the office of the judicial advisor. Other academic and administrative offices may provide coun- seling and support for students. These offices include Counseling Services, Multicultural Student Center, the Om- budsman, the Center for the Education of Women, Sexual Assault Prevention and Awareness Center, the Department of Public Safety, the Lesbian and Gay Male Programs Office, and faculty and staff within the schools and colleges. IV. Emergency Suspension If a student's actions indicate that his or her continued presence on cam- pus orparticipation in University activi- ties poses an imminent danger to per- sons or property, the University may take emergency action through an im- mediate suspension. Before, or within More leadershi, less double-talk D uringPresidentBush's visittodevastated South Miami, he promised to deliver $480 million needed to rebuild Homestead Air Force Base in Miami - a pledge he knew the nation couldn't afford to keep. The Senate Appropriations Com- mittee rejected the president's request for the funds, and should be commended for its actions. Unfortu- nately, the president's attempt to use the base's destruction to his advantage is symptomatic of the reluctance of the U.S. government to convert the nation from a Cold War economy to a peacetime. economy. Since the Pentagon's pledge to close down major installations around the world that were no longer needed for American security, the govern- ment has done so only in two instances-Clark Air Force Base in the Philippines and Homestead in Florida. Actually, Mt. Pinatubo closed Clark and Andrew razed Homestead., Maybe the job of down-sizing defense would be more easily completed if natural disasters struck unneeded military installations more often. (Home- stead was to protect Florida from an invasion from Cuba.) Naturally, thatwon'thappen, so the nation's pared New England residents for a different and demilitarized future. The president's own secretary of defense, Dick Cheney, has stated that his department would not be a "social welfare agency," producing unneeded weapons for the sake of jobs. Yet, Bush has already announced the saleof F-16s to Taiwan andF-15s to Saudi Arabia. In both cases, intense lobbying ef- forts on behalf of defense contractors suckered members of Congress into choosing temporary work for their constituents over the long-term problem of the deficit. There is certainly plenty of blame to go around. Traditional supporters of arms reductions, such as Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), Richard Gephardt (D-Mo.), and Carl Levin (D-Mich.) have all sacri- ficed fiscal responsibility for votes. Maybe that's the nature of the game. If so, the rules need to change. The only way to successfully rescue needed revenue from the black hole of defense spending is' leadership. Congress by its very nature represents local interests, and therefore will not lead the way in making tough sacrifices for the collective ben-