4 - The Michigan Daily - Wednesday, March 29, 1995 (he Lirbigan &zilg DAVID WARTOWSKI STANDING ON THE 01 420 Maynard Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan MICHAEL ROSENBERG Editor in Chief JULIE BECKER JAMEs NASH Editorial Page Editors The meaning of colkege, brought to you by... who ? V ~ _ 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. 't Courting money 'U' would be justiffied to sue for state funds n Monday, University President James J. Duderstadt and Provost Gilbert R. Whitaker Jr. spent part of the day handing out yellow smiley stickers to passersby on the Diag. It was part of Project Smile's "Friendly Days," a week-long effort to spread cheer on campus. All too appropriately, some of the stickers the executive officers gave away were not smiling. Their expressions were twisted into a mixture of sadness, happiness and confusion. Perhaps it was unintentional, but Duderstadt and Whitaker's stickers spoke volumes about the current mood in the Fleming Administra- tion Building, as administrators fight to block the Michigan Legislature's planned cut of $8.4 million to the University. Whitaker and Duderstadt have reason to frown - and if necessary to sue the state to recover the funds. One could call it a case of biting the hand that feeds you, but University officials are serious when they threaten to bring suit against the state. Earlier this month, the House ap- propriations subcommittee voted abruptly to cut off the routine funding increase the Uni- versity was expecting from Lansing. Largely the work of one legislator - Democratic Rep. Morris Hood of Detroit - the funding cut comes in response to what some view as an excessive number of out-of-state students at the University. Of the current student body, 33.4 percent is from outside Michigan, de- spite an informal agreement in 1987 between the Legislature and the University to limit the number to 30 percent. Hood and other law- makers now want to treat the 1987 deal as a formal contract, one the University has ap- parently broken. Such an assumption reveals a fundamen- tal misunderstanding. Nowhere does the Uni- versity have a contract with its benefactors in Lansing that specifies the number of out-of- state students the school can admit. And in allowing the number to exceed 30 percent, University officials were reacting to a tempo- rary decline in the academic qualifications of in-state applicants. Simply put, University of- ficials were attempting to maintain a stable level of quality in its student body. No contract was broken - at least not by the University. The state, on the other hand, is obliged to provide the University - along with other public universities in Michigan - with an inflationary increase for each budget year. The University reasonably expected a 3-percent increase this year, necessary although woe- fully inadequate to defray the rising costs of the institution. The Legislature broke its con- tract with the University by denying the school at least an inflationary increase. The Univer- sity should be successful arguing in court that the state, not the University, acted in bad faith by breaking the contract between the two. As for whether the University ultimately retrieves the money that has been wrongfully denied, a state judge may have to decide. The outcome, if it follows the letter of the agreement between the Legislature and the University, should plant a smile on the collec- tive face of the Fleming Building. The choosing of commencement speak- ers seems to be humongous mystery on campus. We wait and wait until they announce who will be telling us the mean- ing of perhaps the most intense years of our lives. In recent days, I have heard more and more whispering among students: When will they pick somebody? Have they announced it yet? No, I don't think they announced it yet... And what is funny is that no one knows who they are. I had to call three or four University offices before finding out from Walter Harrison, chief flak for the Univer- sity of Michigan, that he, Rackham Dean John D'Arms and President James J. Duderstadt are the main players who se- lect the commencement speakers. Even some people in Harrison's office could only give me one piece of vital infor- mation: "They haven't announced it yet." Who are they? "I don't know." Why this is a mystery, I don't know. It shouldn't be. Facts are that John D'Arms takes nomi- nations from anybody on campus -includ- ing students - to be candidates for honor- ary degrees. The president's office then selects a person from these individuals to speak at commencement. Yet, except for one bid for Kevorkian last year, Harrison does not remember any students having made nominations. This has got to change. A famous, respectable person comes to Ann Arbor. He or she talks to all of the graduates about what their education meant Jm LASSER and how it fits in to their lives. The speech is written entirely for the students. Yet the speaker was chosen by the administration. It is too late to make nominations for this April, but it's not too late for future com- mencements. My candidate: Harrison Ford. He can't write a comic strip, but this actor is everything a commencement speaker should be. The official qualifications of a good commencement speaker are that he or she: 1) Is interesting to students 2) Gives a good speech 3) Has made a major contribution to his or her field 4) Doesn't need to be affiliated with the University of Michigan. I rest my case. Harrison Ford meets all four of these credentials. Only thing is: He didn't get a bid. I figured Walter Harrison, co-owner of the cool name "Harrison," would like the idea of Harrison (Ford) speaking at the University, if not merely for the chance to meet someone with a similar name. If someone were to have the first name Wartowski, I know I'd like to meet him. His response to the idea seemed posi- tive. So I know they'd take the nomination seriously. "Harrison Ford would certainly be the type of person we're looking for," Harrison (Walter) said. I knew he'd like the idea. Who wouldn't? Heartthrob, great actor, not-so-good- a-beard-but-still-a-good-actor-in-"The- Fugitive," Ford is a shoe-in. Think about it. Harrison Ford symbol- izes all that a student should be: adventur- ous, calm under pressure and smart. Plus Harrison puts his smarts to use: While cracking whips and stealing idols, Indiana Jones knows a lot about old legends and lost covenants and other old stuff. Educated at Ripon College, Ford was a carpenter before landing acting roles. And during his acting career, Ford has played space men, archeologists, teen-agers, law- yers and doctors. Harrison Ford is a Re- naissance Man. And judging from his carpentry experi- ence, there is certainly a strong correlation between Ford and his characters. His characters: 1) are good-looking 2) can crack a whip 3) run from boulders and natives 4) are very smart. Ford: 1) is good-looking 2) can use a hammer 3) can probably run 4) has an education. The only thing Harrison doesn't have going for him is that no one nominated him. And if no one calls John D'Arms' office before next year with a nomination, then the administration will have chosen the 1996 commencement speaker without a say from the students. We will have just sat and waited for the answer. And we will complain when it is Cathy Guisewite. It's too late for those of us who are graduating to nominate our heroes. But for those of you who with some semesters left, don't make it too late to nominate yours. i i SHARP AS TOAST American Prisons: 1995 One sentenced for life, the other usually for sixty days. - - -- - P 3 EU U Ii__I t, - Measuring intelligence Guatemala case sounds call for CIA overhaul N: U 'i ~ - \1 I I I {t 'N The latest fracas surrounding the Central Intelligence Agency and covert actions abroad has resulted in renewed calls from Capitol Hill that the broad, far-reaching pur- poses of the agency be redefined. The most recent disaster concerns an al- leged joint CIA, State Department and Na- tional Security Council cover-up over the fate of two men - one an American and the other the Guatemalan husband of an American law- yer- in the hands of the Guatemalan military. At issue are two grievances. The first one concerns the fact that the Guatemalan military, long notorious for human rights abuses, de- tained and tortured both of these men for two years under the auspices of the CIA. The second one stems from the veil of deception and misinformation that the wife of one of the victims, Jennifer Harbury, had to overcome to learn the truth about what had happened to her husband. According to Rep. Robert Torricelli (D-N.J.), the State Department knew for two years that Julio Roberto Alpirez had been killed by a paid CIA informant but withheld this information from his widow. Clearly, this demonstrates the agency's willful disregard for following American law in dictating foreign policy. For decades, cer- tain instances of secret CIA and National Security Council involvement around the globe have ignored congressional directives and international sovereignty. The guise for such actions was long accepted as "vital How TO CONTACT THm national security interests." But now, with the end of the Cold War and the emergence of new threats, it is unclear just whose security interests the agency is protecting. Obviously, in this particular case, it was not protecting the interests of Americans. The inherent problem with the CIA is not the existence of the agency itself, as some claim. Certainly there is value in intelligence and covert activity in a world rife with eco- nomic conflict and terrorism. However, the CIA has also proven incapable of managing itself. Cases such as the one in Guatemala and the Aldrich Ames spy debacle show that there are too many holes in the agency - too many departments with complete autonomy from the agency as a whole. That the CIA can claim ignorance in the tragedy in Guatemala is sadly believable: It is possible that the top brass may have known nothing about the Guatemalan military situation, just as it had no idea why a minor employee in counter- intelligence like Aldrich Ames was suddenly experiencing a windfall of wealth. At a time when the nature of world security threats is changing drastically, the CIA re- mains an agency at war with its own govern- ment and with itself. It is time for the Clinton administration and Congress to re-evaluate the agency's role in this post-Cold War world. The need for the restructuring and possible consolidation of the agency has never been clearer.. t - itt r lme Sweet oJme ,77 %Vfimwmw-. --- . L'I'Erm's Help fight Republicans' Contract 'on' America To the Daily: As a member of CACOA, the Coalition Against the Con- tract on America, I wish to re- but so-called "arguments" made by Michael Wheaton in his letter defending the Far Right's most recent attack on the majority of Americans ("'Lyric' off-key on politics," 3/23/95). First, Wheaton claims that Washington has been fighting "welfare" since 1960. Govern- ment programs like Aid to Families with Dependent Chil- dren fight poverty, not wel- fare. The Contract "On" America, however, does seek to fight welfare, thereby in- creasing poverty. The Personal Responsibility Act would deny assistance to 6 million poor children, half the children cur- rently on AFDC. Other cuts could mean 200,000 children expelled from Head Start, 200,000 kicked out of day care, 7.5 million without school lunches, 2 million pregnant women and their infants de- nied food and milk, and 900,000 disabled children re- ceiving SSI losing benefits. All of this proves Mr. Lichtstein is correct in stating that Republi- ans are "slahing thie rnial ("Newt's Contract: It slices, it dices, it soaks the poor!" 3/16/ 95). Second, Wheaton advocates limiting the tax "burdens" im- posed on wealthy Americans, arguing they have "worked hard for their fortune" and these taxes will stop the wealthy from "pro- viding jobs." This is pure Reaganomics, or "trickle-down" theory. It was also completely discredited in the 1980s. The Contract "On" America em- braces these policies of "Voodoo Economics" through numerous reverse Robin-Hood measures which take from the poor to give to the rich. Capital gains tax cuts, $500 per-child tax credits for families earning up to $200,000 a year (a few Republicans have recently suggested lowering this to the measly sum of $95,000 a year), and increased defense spending will all make the rich richer and the poor poorer. The Contract "On" America also takes the prevention money out of the 1994 crime bill, so we can erect more prisons and ex- pand the use of the death penalty. It attacks laws that protect the environment through unfunded mandates, cost/benefit analysis and "takings" provisions. It make it harder In e cornora- age awards like those imposed on Exxon for the Valdez spill. It slashes education spending and student loans. It scapegoats im- migrants, cuts off funds to de- fend abortion clinics, and its homophobic sponsors seekto bar the use of federal funds that would "directly or indirectly" condone or accept homosexuality. The members of the CACOA have joined together to fight this Far Right attack on the majority of Americans. We are sponsoring a Rally and March Against the Contract, beginning at noon on the Diag, today. This action will be part of a coordi- nated National Day of Protest involving more than 150 other colleges and universities across the nation. Only 23 percent of eligible voters voted in the last election, and only 52 percent of those voted for GOP candidates. A contract the majority of Ameri- cans didn't consent to isn't a Contract "With" America, it's a Contract "On" America. Join CACOA today at noon on the Diag to demonstrate against the contract, and in favor of a pro- gressive, anti-racist, anti-sexist, anti-homophobic agenda! Hays Elisen NOTABLE QUOTABLE "There may be some (athletes) who are less qualified, but I think they can all read and write." - Athletic Director Joe Roberson, on the academic level of University athletes Hill Aud. a bad concert venue To the Daily: Tuesday evening, I was for* tunate enough to see Live per- form at Hill Auditorium. Alto- gether it was only an acceptable concert despite the fact that Live put on a great show. I love con- certs, and even saw Live perform before - they put on a great show -the only significant dif- ference between the previous show I saw and the one on Tues- day was the venue. Hill Auditorium (like many other venues) forbids smoking in the theatre. This is not unexpected or unnecessary. What is unnec- essary is the overly vigilant at- tempt to find smokers. Several times during the show, security would pan over the audience with aflashlightto see smokers. When I go to a concert, the last thing I want is to have flashlights blind me in an attempt to find smokers - that is taking things to far. That was not the only prob- lem with Hill. The faulty layout placed me in the section directly in front of the spotlights. Be- cause of this design flaw, nobodo in the section (1st balcony, cen- ter) was able to stand during the show (I guess they thought we might block the spotlights). What gives? Part of the concert experi- University Regent Deane Baker (R-Ann Arbor) 4944 Scio Church Rd. Ann Arbor, MI 48103 University Regent Shirley McFee (R-Battle Creek) 611 Jennings Landing University Regent Laurence Deitch (D-Bloomfield Hills) 2000 Town Center, Suite 1500 Southfield, MI 48075 University Regent Rebecca McGowan (D-Ann Arbor) 2210 Melrose Ave. I i