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.

November 15, 1994 - Image 4

Resource type:
The Michigan Daily, 1994-11-15

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

4 - The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, November 15, 1994
aIite Skbijuu i uirg

'People have developed an auditory intelligence. They
listen to Dylan and Cobain on the radio... exactly where
my work is being censored.'
- Noted Beat poet Allen Ginsberg on the FCC banning his work from radio airwaves

420 Maynard
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan

Editor in Chief
Samuel Goodstein
Flint Wainess

Editorial Page Editors
Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of a majority of the Daily's editorial board. All
other articles, letters, and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily.
Vote Michigan Parlty

TEAHEA95ANT *sPEcLL..* 99t-
> CAM' /
'N( o

oc now/I


As the debate over funding for the Ann
bor Tenants' Union (AATU) fades
from the purview of the Michigan Student
Assembly (MSA) and into the hands of stu-
dents, in the shape of a ballot question, MSA
should enter an era of good feeling, of sorts.
While there are three parties slating candi-
dates for tomorrow's MSA election, where 15
representatives will be chosen, neither the
Michigan, Students' nor Wolverine parties
have salient issue differences of concern to
students. In large part, all three parties agree
that campus safety, the desire for a non-voting
student regent and flaws with the Statement of
Student Rights and Responsibilities (the Code)
highlight the agenda - and the parties gener-
ally agree on the solutions. In prior MSA
elections, the parties often were a microcosm
of national electoral forces, with a Progressive
Party and Conservative Coalition each es-
pousing ideological agendas. Today, ideology
is a non-issue; expertise is the key. Only a
party that has experienced, knowledgeable
leaders with the political savvy and expertise
to deal with the administration and campus
issues will be able to make strides in reforming
the code, and to a lesser degree improving
campus safety and student representation. For
this reason, we endorse THE MICHIGAN
The Michigan Party is far from flawless, to
be sure. However, they have returned credibil-
ity and respect to MSA, and have focused
attention on important issues. While the Stu-
dents' Party has a generally laudable platform,
and no doubt the will to carry it out, they
simply lack the experience and credibility of
MichiganParty leaders. Time and againMichi-
gan Party leaders have demonstrated that they
have a firm grip on the intricacies of the code,
and the pragmatism necessary to chip away at
it. Furthermore, they have made important

strides to increase campus safety (the four new
lights on Washtenaw, for instance, were due in
large part to Michigan Party candidate Andrew
Wright), as well as awareness of same, and
have shown a willingness to put in the time to
master issues like the Code and the Diag Policy.
Finally, they have increased student represen-
tation in Lansing by hiring a professional lob-
byist to represent student concerns. Simply
put: to vote the Michigan Party out of office
now is to risk jeopardizing the small, but im-
portant, steps student leaders have taken vis-a-
vis the administration.
There are a few caveats to our endorsement.
The first is based upon the understanding that
opposition is a healthy thing. With this in mind,
we recommend voting for DANTE STELLA
in LSA, DEVON BODOH in the Business
School and BRIAN ELLIOT in the College of
Engineering, all members of The Students'
Party. These men promise to provide healthy
opposition to Michigan Party rule, and have
proven to be effective watchdogs for student
concerns. Furthermore, we recommend AN-
GELA KELIC, Independent candidate in the
College of Engineering. A hard-working in-
cumbent, she has done important work on the
campus safety issue and on items of concern to
her constituency on North Campus.
While the political debate may not be as
heated as in years past, the issues that concern
today's MSA are as, or more, important than
any in recent memory. Tackling these issues
will require organization and expertise-quali-
ties that the Michigan Party can boast to have.
While the Students' Party has some good can-
didates, and the Wolverine Party has a platform
that is hardly objectionable, the Michigan Party
deserves a mandate to continue their reforms.
Cast your ballot for the Michigan Party on
Tuesday or Wednesday.





f !11A

NWROC not a true women's organization

To the Daily:
For the benefit of first-year
students and those not follow-
ing campus politics, I would
like to examine the National
Women's Rights Organizing
Coalition (NWROC) a bit
more closely. Recently, Jodi
Masley, the putative head of
NWROC, wrote a letter en-
couraging women to join her
organization and to "fight."
There are two things people
should know about NWROC.
First, despite the name, it is
not a women's organization.
Bluntly, they arejust left-wing
crazies who, every once in a
while, organizesomething
having to do with women's
rights. You may know them
best by their calls to "smash
the fascists" and for "no free
speech for fascists." Much of
NWROC's agenda (and fund-
ing) is determined by the Revo-
lutionary Workers' League. an
equally anti-Constitution, anti-
human rights group. In the stu-

dent elections last winter,
NWROC ran on a platform that
advocated overthrow of the re-
gents and "student/worker tri-
bunals instead of the Code."
Don't get suckered by their
rhetoric. Much of their recent
activity has been centered
around recruiting, using
women's issues as a device.
Second, this group wants to
take away the fundamental
American right of freedom of
speech. Not only do they advo-
cate violence against those who
they disagree with, but flyers
last year bragged about putting
someone in the hospital at a
rally they attended. Plainly, this
infantile and immature politi-
cal ideology can only be harm-
ful. In fact, during a discussion
I had at FestiFall, an NWROC
member told me that because I
disagreed with the group, she
believed it was appropriate to
commit violence against me.
Maybe they'll come after me
because I wrote this...I'mquak-

ing in my boots.
NWROC's actions in the
Jennifer Ireland case are valu-
able. However, the group as a
whole doesn't seem to reflect
the values of women (or any-
one, for that matter). It is good
to have them on campus,
though, because they bring the
ever-important issue of civil
liberties for all to a focus. To
that end, a new organization is
forming, called the Students'
Civil Liberties Watch (SCLW).
Our goals: to reprimand mo-
rons who call for an abridge-
ment of civil liberties, to sup-
port the privacy rights of
women, and to enforce and
monitor thedrights of all stu-
dents, including lesbians, bi-
sexuals, and gay men, within
the University and our com-
If you're interested, watch
for flyers or email
-Civ.Lib @um.cc.umich.edu."
Ethan Kirschner
LSA Student

"Baby killers"
and Southern
It was a heart wrenching story:
two little boys, strapped securely in
their car seats, stolen away from their
sobbing mother in a caracking out-
side Union. South Carolina. What
happened next was even more heart
wrenching: Susan Smith, the boys'
mother, confessed to killing Michael,#
3 years, and Alex, 14 months.
Yet aside from its shocking end-
ing. Smith's story is familiar- a tale
of marriage and motherhood, lost
opportunities and failing finances that
has been lived by young Southern
women for decades.
Voted "friendliest female" in the
Class of 89, Smith smiles out from
her graduation picture with styled
hair and careful makeup. She was an
honors student and a member of the
Math Club, apparently bound for a
bright future.
Yet by 1990 she was working as
a cashier in a Winn-Dixie supermar-
ket; the news reports give no hint of
why this bright young woman did
not attend college. By the next year,
she had other concerns: two months
pregnant, she married David Smith,
the assistant manager at the Winn-
Dixie where she worked.
Michael was born seven months
later, and was soon joined by brother
Alex. But all was not well in the
happy family; Susan and David filed
for divorce in September. At 23, Su-
san Smith was the divorced single
parent of two young children.
She was also deeply in debt. Her
job as a secretary at a textile plant
paid her $1,096 a month, but her
basic expenses added up to $1,284.
She still owed money to the doctor
who delivered Alex, and even
David's child support payments could
not bridge the gap between her earn-
ings and the money it took to raise
two children.
Yet there was hope on the hori-
zon: still young and attractive, she
started dating Tom Findlay, the son
of the owner of the plant where she
worked. But the boss' son was still
uncertain about Susan - he wasn't
sure he could handle the responsi-
bilities of Smith's ready-made fam-
Smith had other troubles in her
past - a father who committed sui-
cide when she was 8, and several of
her own suicide attempts. Yet
Findlay's letter, written a week be-
fore the boys' disappearance, pro-
vides the only clear motive in the
case. Susan had found the knight in
shining armor who could provide for
her, and her children were an ob-
We will never know what went
through Susan Smith's mind the night
she drove through the woods for
hours, the night when she watched

her children sink to the bottom of a
murky lake to theiradeaths. But it is
clear that she felt trapped.
At least by the definition of a
Small Southern Christian town, she
had done everything right. Not a high-
powered career woman, she met an
attractive man, married him when
she discovered she was pregnant,
and tried to be a good mother to two
children. When the marriage didn't
work out, as marriages between 20-
year-olds often do not, she looked to
a new man to support herself and her
Susan -and ultimately her chil-
dren - fell victim to the culture that
raised them. Think about how differ-
ent this story would be if Susan had
gone to college, if she hadn't worked
at a classically low-paying female
job, if her child care expenses didn't
eat up almost a third of her monthly
salary. Smith saw no way out except
through a man with money - a man
who, understandably, wasn't sure he
mildi he an mnctant father to twxn

Administration Speaker Gingrich takes office

AATU referendum
Vote YES on Question A, NO on Question B


This semester's MSA election ballot con
tains more than the traditional choice of
student candidates -this week, students will
vote on a referendum for the Ann Arbor Ten-
ants Union (AATU).
This vote clearly holds tremendous impor-
tance for students, MSA and the campus at
large. The AATU, which last year received
$23,000 from MSA, saw its funding for this
year drastically cut to a mere $2000 by the
current MSA leadership. As this allotment
would not even cover the AATU's operating
expenses through the outcome of this week's
referendum, the AATU continually asked
MSA for more funding and an ounce of fair-
ness, only to be squarely denied. As a result,
the AATU has turned to charging students -
its major constituency - a blanket fee to use
its once-gratuitous services.
Supporters of the AATU correctly point
out that this organization, the only organiza-
tion not affiliated with the University to offer
students advice on off-campus housing and
the landlords that manage such housing, de-
serves more money than the average student
organization. Simply put, the AATU's ser-
vices are not matched by any other organiza-
tion on campus. Perhaps more importantly,
these services are vital to all students.
Opponents - who believe that the Univer-
sity offers the same services through the Off-
Campus Housing Authority and Student Le-
gal Services -currently own a majority in the
Assembly, and have been able to successfully
pass substantial funding cuts for the Tenants
Union. Central to their reasoning is the belief
.L.. A AM k~Alraei~ ;n~t nrv~c

nizations on campus. The result: a $20,000
budget shortfall for the AATU.
This page believes that students need a
resource on campus that provides adequate
advice and information concerning off-cam-
pus housing. This resource must help students
in signing leases, retrieving security deposits
and dealing with landlords. Without such a
resource, students are without an advocate in
their search for off-campus housing. This ser-
vice is a necessity - although exactly who
provides the service is irrelevant. To date, this
page has simply not been persuaded that, apart
from the services of the AATU, other organi-
zations sufficiently provide this resource.
In this light, we recommend that students
vote YES on Question A on the MSA ballot
this week. This proposal will increase the MSA
fee paid for through tuition by 25 cents, effec-
tive next semester. All of the increased funding
generated through this new mechanism will be
allotted specifically to the AATU. The AATU
is an invaluable, and presently unmatched,
resource for all students, and this increase in
the MSA fee is more than justified to help fund
this organization.
We recommend that students vote NO on
Question B. This question, which would in-
crease the same MSA fee by 18 cents to be
directed to the general reserve fund, is irrel-
evant - MSA has continually voted down
motions to reopen this reserve fund, and any
increase in this fund will not go to the AATLU.
We urge students to consider the impor-
tance of this referendum, and vote accordingly.
Just think - when your security deposit is not

salaries are
out of control
ITo the Daily:
It isn't reasonable that
administrative salaries not
only outpace faculty and staff
salaries, but that they con-
tinue to rise out of control
while tuition costs skyrocket.
How naddening that the VP
for University relations,
Walter Harrison, prefers to
raise the salaries of full pro-
fessors to match those of the
bureaucracy, than to cut back
on administrative excesses.
If departments can tighten
their belts on services, then so
can the administration. I'd
ratherhave lowertuition costs
and a slimmer, trimmer ad-
ministration. Do they really
need the plush offices of
Wolverine towers, a fortress'
like the Fleming Building and
salaries six times that of my
The University of Michi-
gan is a fine university, but
can we still considerate a pub-
lic university? How much do
students and parents, mostly
citizens of the state of Michi-
gan, have in determining the
salaries of this University's
public administration. Are
they working for us, or do we
merely give them a means by
which to buy more Mercedes?
Alan Crowley
Rackham graduate
Nice column,

To the Daily:
After the overwhelming
Republican victories in the elec-
tions last Tuesday, I sit here
pondering the leaders and plans
of the Republican party for the
104th Congress. What do I see?
I see Newt Gingrich as Speaker
of the House. A man who has
over and over again declared
American civilization to be the
"greatest" and "most unique"
in the history of the human race.
A man who believes America
needs to "renew itself' be re-
turning to what it was prior to
the 1960s. We are left to believe
that, for Gingrich, such horrid
liberal action such as the Civil
Rights Act of 1964 and the first
Earth Day in 1970 (just to name
a couple of landmark events in
this nation's progress) are con-
sidered to be detrimental.
If only we could return to
that wonderful time, the 1950s,
they heyday of the Cold War
and the "separate-but-equal"
Who is there back up
Gingrich? How about Bob Dole,
Jesse Helms, Bob Packwood,
Strom Thurmond, just to name

So Newt Gingrich is the
man who engineered, effec-
tively, the platform of the GOP,
the so-called "Contract with
America." Looking into this
"Contract" we find that it calls
for: 1) cutting social spending
from the Crime Bill which
passed the 103rd Congress; 2)
cuts in welfare, Medicare and
other entitlements; 3) increases
in defense spending; 4) a with-
drawal of all United States
troops now under the United
Nations command (effectively
leading to a tremendous loss in
the U.N.'s ability to keep peace
internationally); and the list
goes on.
Policies which, in sum, will
serve to increase the already
growing domestic gap between
the rich and the poor, increase
the national deficit with mili-
tary spending (remember the
1980s?) and isolate us from the
international community.
Is that what we, the Ameri-
can people, authorized? And,
if so, is that what we want?
Andre Verani
LSA Senior



service for



Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan