4A - The Michigan Daily - Monday, October 26, 1998
be Sitit r ?ait
420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
Edited and managed by
students at the
University of Michigan
LAURIE MAVK
Editor in Chief
JACK SCHILLACI
Editorial Page Editor
Uness otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board.
A ll other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daiy
FROM THE DAILY
Referenda cover many important topics
E QUOTABLE
Today, I want all women to forget about Diet Coke!'
- LSA junior Lara Zador, speaking at the first National Young
Women 's Day ofAction on the steps ofAngell Hall.
A AMRAN HAFEZ A IT APPENS
" Tov St4A LT UWAVE NSME 01t~: w Tasn igr mEh tiVPMi&
."t 'OT M E g o M $T M T $04""
L 01 &a 10 NAMU
T O SALT OT
tE SA1 AtMSTM a
P rr w JONR'S
LRO MTR
Y <. MIL1
uPR
ETTERSTO THE EDITOR
very election day comes packed with a
big choice: Who to pick at the polls? But
voters have another task to face when they
head to the polls on Nov. 3- deciding how to
vote on ballot questions. And this year's refer-
enda cover some incredibly important topics
that will affect many areas of students' lives.
State Proposal A
Proposal A is a constitutional amend-
ment that would change the word "handi-
capped" to "disabled" in/ Article VIII,
Section 8 of the State Constitution. The
change simply makes the Constitution's
wording more friendly. Vote YES on
Proposal A.
State Proposal B
Citizens should never be put into a situ-
ation that forces them to choose between
one of their most fundamental rights and
horrible legislation. Proposal B, however,
has done just that. Next week, Michigan
voters will have to decide whether the right
to die is important enough to allow state
legislators to make decisions best made by
doctors and create a committee hidden from
public scrutiny. But the flaws in Proposal B
can be remedied after it is passed - estab-
lishing the right to die for Michigan resi-
dents is of paramount importance.
One of the biggest flaws in the legislation is
that it makes uninformed attempts to put a
quantitative measurement on what ought to be
qualitative. The legislation mandates that
patients who wish to end their suffering must
be terminally ill with six months or fewer to
live. This could prove difficult for even the
most experienced doctors. Still worse, patients
who are not necessarily terminally ill but who
face tremendous suffering every day will not
be able to seek a physician-assisted suicide.
Another gigantic flaw in Proposal B is the
constitutionally questionable establishment of
an oversight committee appointed by the gov-
ernor. The committee and all of its records
would be exempt from the state's Open
Meetings Act and the Freedom of Information
Act. It is not difficult to see the problems with
this - all public bodies should be open to
scrutiny.
It ought to be taken as a given that people
who are suffering should have the right to end
their pain through physician-assisted suicide.
But the political climate in Michigan has
yielded a referendum with some of the worst
fine print in history. Ideally, the drafters of
Proposal B would have carefully consulted the
medical establishment along with the
Constitution before they put legislation before
the voters. They did not, and as a result,
Michigan voters have to approve a monstrosi-
ty if the state is going to allow them to exer-
cise their right to die. Thankfully, Proposal B
can be modified by a three-fourths majority of
both houses of the state Legislature after it is
approved. Right-to-die proponents throughout
the state are set on modifying the worst lan-
guage in the referendum and the courts should
strike down the proposal's unconstitutional
aspects.
Most important, the passage of Proposal
B will give people the right to choose when
to end their suffering. A "yes" vote on
Proposal B is not an endorsement of irre-
sponsible legislation, but a vote in favor of
a basic right that the state is currently with-
holding. Conversely, a "no" vote on
Proposal B allows assisted suicide oppo-
nents to claim that voters do not want physi-
cian-assisted suicide at all. Voting "no" and
hoping that something better will come
along is very risky. First things first - vot-
ers should take their rights back. Vote YES
on Proposal B.
State Proposal C
Proposal C, also known as the Clean
Michigan Initiative, warrants passage because
it addresses environmental problems that have
hpan mreA hd the tat in reent var If
ity, prevent pollution, abate lead contamina-
tion, reclaim and revitalize community water-
fronts, enhance recreational opportunities and
clean up contaminated sediments in lakes,
rivers and streams.
The problem with Proposal C is the poli-
tics that have surrounded the uncontroversial
ballot initiative. Several powerful politicians,
including Gov. John Engler and U.S. Sen.
Spencer Abraham (R-Mich.), are hiding their
poor environmental records behind the mask
of Proposal C. Engler has slashed and cut the
Department of Natural Resources budget,
effectively rendering it useless, and he encour-
aged the use of Michigan as a second home
for trash from other states. On top of that,
although this proposal is a good idea, the pol-
luters of the state are the ones who should be
funding it, not taxpayers. Polluters created the
contaminated sites - they should be the ones
to pay for their revitalization. Due to the cur-
rent political climate, polluters who have
destroyed parts of Michigan will likely never
bear the full cost of their damage because that
would, supposedly, hurt the economy. Given
these circumstances, voters should support
Proposal C because it is the only way such
environmental problems will be handled. Vote
YES on Proposal C.
Washtenaw County Proposal 1
One of the biggest problems facing
Michigan is urban sprawl and its costs.
Washtenaw County Proposal 1 would address
such growth in the Ann Arbor area. Gradually,
people have moved further away from down-
town, which could possibly reduce the Ann
Arbor area to an urban ghost town in the
future. These new developments outside the
city are extremely costly to the environment
and taxpayers' pocketbooks. Being further
from the cities, urban sprawl is automobile
and service dependent, creating the need for
roads, schools, emergency services, sewer
maintenance and other basic necessities of a
town to be paid for by taxpayers.
The proposal would raise taxes 40 cents per
$1,000 of property. For instance, half the mar-
ket value of a $130,000 home is $65,000, and
the owner would have to pay $26 per year for
10 years - a small price to pay in the long run.
The money would be used to purchase
development rights from farmers, which will
preserve farmland to be sold for agricultural
purposes only. The rest of the money will go
to the acquisition of specific types of land, like
wetlands and wildlife habitat, the revitaliza-
tion of abandoned urban areas, and toward the'
coordination of planned growth in the area. If
the Ann Arbor downtown area becomes aban-
doned and empty, there will be significant
consequences for the University. Students and
faculty use many of the downtown-area ser-
vices frequently - making their preservation
important to the quality of life students expe-
rience. Vote YES on Proposal 1.
Washtenaw County Proposal 2
While the state's corrections system is not
exactly approaching bankruptcy, students
should nonetheless vote in favor of this pro-
posal. If the money cannot be had from with-
in the county, the Board of Commissioners
may go to the state to fund the renovations.
Considering the state's propensity for taking
money for higher education and dumping it
into corrections, voting against this proposal
could prove dangerous to the University's
appropriation. Vote YES on Proposal 2.
Washtenaw Community College Proposal
This proposal would allot Washtenaw
Community College approximately $8.9 mil-
lion dollars by renewing an existing property
tax. The tax provides for essential components
of education, such as providing students with
computer access and basic programs.
Renewing the tax will not increase the amount
that Washtenaw County residents currently
pay. The college is an important, widely
rceicihle fnrm nf higher ecation for the
'U'maybe
unprepared
for Y2K bug
TO THE DAILY:
I am a recent graduate of
the University working for a
computer software company.
I just read the article on the
University's discussion of the
Y2K problem ("ITD address-
es 'worst-case scenario' in
Y2K problem," 10/19/98).
If the University is just
starting to think now about
the problems they may face
n the year 2000, they are
way behind schedule.
Just certifying the comput-
ers is not enough. All of the
infrastructure at the University
must be tested, and in many
cases replaced or updated,
I recommend the
University retain a consulting
firm to oversee the Y2K
problem scenario. Trying to
update all the infrastructure at
the University by November
of 1999 is definitely cutting it
close. It should be finished
earlier and then tested before
that fateful day.
Good luck: I hope the
University handles this possi-
ble problem scenario better
than it has handled others in
the past. In this matter, there
are no easy second chances.
ETHAN STETTNER
UNIVERSITY ALUMNUS
One mUSt not
cherish sin for
forgiveness
TO THE DAILY:
I would like to applaud
Jennifer Walters for her state-
ments at the Coming Out of
the Closet Day on the Diag on
Oct. 16. She was both inspira-
tional and thought provoking
in her statements about
Christians the Church and
their thoughts and reactions to
homosexuality (specifically,
the death of Matthew
Shepard).
Walters main argument
was: "To be queeraand faith-
ful is not a contradiction."
One must agree that this
statement is true (on one
interpretation). To be queer
and faithful to a romantic
interest is quite possible,
since romantic fidelity solely
consists of remaining with
that person. To be queer and
faithful to a country is also
quite possible, since patriotic
faith or pride is the love and
adoration for one's country.
However, in the context of
being faithful to be queer and
faithful to God I will note, is
not only a contradiction, but an
incredible misunderstanding of
God (or the Christian God).
Jesus said, "Yet a time is com-
ing and has now come when
tlC- ,- nrci-nc~c ilnr
all sin. So Walters could
argue, (as we so often hear) if
God is love and forgives,
even if homosexuality is a
sin, God will forgive her.
That is where the misunder-
standing of God occurs.
God is love, but He is
also just, and He has deemed
what is sin and what is not.
God has ordained that any-
thing against him or what He
has said is sin. God hates sin,
and when we sin (whether
Christian, non-Christian,
homosexual, transgendered
or heterosexual), God hates
it. But because of the death
of Jesus, God forgives us if
we ask for it. Does that mean
that we stop sinning when we
believe in Jesus? No. But we
are called to stop cherishing
our sins. Psalm 66:18 says
that God will not hear us if
we cherish our sin. I sin just
as much as any other person,
but because I believe that
Jesus died for me (and you)
about 2,000 years ago, I am
forgiven.
I also know that God
hears my prayers and my
desire for forgiveness
because I do not cherish my
lies, my lusts and my pride
(though I do these things).
To cherish homosexuality
and be a man or woman of
faith will only lead to anger,
either at God or at yourself. I
invite all gay, lesbian and
transgendered men and
women to regard truth. God
wants to show you his incredi-
ble love, but the Bible says
that He cannot do that while
we cherish our sin. I invite you
to come to Jesus for peace.
never be suitable models for
human disease. Animal
research has taken far too
much money and attention
from more applicable scientif-
ic techniques. Many prominent
medical professionals, such as
Henry Heimlich and Charles
Mayo, have called vivisection
into question. Many advances,
such as the use of anesthetics,
have come about without ani-
mal testing. And animal testing
is unreliable - the drug
thalidomide caused birth
defects in more than 10,000
humans after being found safe
on rats, mice, rabbits, dogs,
hamsters and primates, while
the valuable drug penicillin
kills guinea pigs. The truth is
that animal research is a long-
standing tradition that pro- ~
duces results which are easily
published and bring huge
amounts of funding to univer-
sities. But the large majority of
animal testing is repetitive,
unnecessary and unscientific.
The animal advocates I
know and support do not "put
animal life above human life"
as Jeschke suggests. We are
advocates for all life and
want cures found to horrible
illnesses as much as anyone.
Animal activists realize that
breaking into a lab and
stomping on the brains of
mice is not themost effective
way to further the cause.
ALLISON HESS
LSA SENIOR
Violence
taints protest
of racism
TO THE DAILY:
I am writing in response
to David Gaskill's letter
("Taub's letter was r'idicu-
lous,"' 10/23/98). Gaskill said
that City of Ann Arbor was
being unfair. Who caused the
destruction of city property?
The ones that have the
"courage to fight bigotry."
Does one's beliefs make it
legal to do whatever one
wants? No. Laws make it
legal for groups, such as the
KKK, to speak their views
without fear of attack. Does
it make their views better
than your own - no! It
would be a pretty messy
world if it were possible to
legally attack anyone with
whom you disagreed.
Anti-racist beliefs are
obviously far more noble
than the Klan's, but let them
be ignorant and let us be civi-
lized. We should not look
like babies throwing a temper
tantrum, we must look
mature and organized.
And another point - what
did the protest accomplish?
The protesters were arrested
and looked like fools in the
media. The Klan performs
these rallies to make their
opposition act foolishly and to
nit :-.34-4:- t nn rnn' :_ r
The working
class plight of
the NBA player
G reed has always been a great
American tradition. It is the legacy
of illustrious settlers who "negotiated"
land from Native Americans; it is the
culture of our hedonistic media icons;
is a staple of middle-class life. An'
today the tradition lives on in one of our
most sacred
arenas: The
National
Basketball
Association.
Through the
eye of the fan,
it's difficult to
what's got all a
these million-
aires so ticked SCoT
off. Fans HUNTER
swarmed to RtOI. lI iT l_ 'I
games last sea- ITmi S meU
son in record
numbers.Franchise owners are far from
destitute. And the average player earns
$1.4 million per year.
But not everyone's greed has been
sufficiently satiated.s0
Franchise owners, claiming the
financial failure of several teams, want
to find a way to limit the growth of
players' salaries.
Players, unsettled by the great wage
disparity within the league, want fran-
chise owners to divvy money among
players more equitably.
By all respects, this is your classic
proletariat labor battle.
On the court, you have a struggling
lower caste of NBA players who earr
less than $1 million, while otner players
- the ones we care about - make
several million dollars each season (and
get all the women, too). The working-
class players are struggling to bring
some semblance of wage equity to the
league so they don't have to all feel
quite so inferior to the bourgeois play-
ers like Shaq.
In the stands, you have NBA com
missioners and franchise owners, tradi
tionally fat with earnings, who have
suddenly claimed that unreasonably
high salaries have made it so that they
can no longer subsist comfortably off
the players' sweat. The league and the
franchise owners want to place a more
or less uniform cap on players' salaries
so that they can buy better players for
less money.
But neither side is really talking.
So while we adoring common peopl*
sit restlessly at home watching all the
dry sports on ESPN, players and owners
spend the first two weeks of cancelled
season settling their labor dispute.
As a member of the expendable class
of common folk, it continually proves a
challenge for me to understand NBA
players' big gripe. These guys are lav-
ished with fabulous cash and prizes
each year; and they get to make high-
qualityrap records and appear in com-
mercials. Plus, if everything works out
just so, they can each have up to 20,000
women over the course over a career.
Doesn't sound like too difficult a life
now does it?
But as I've only just come to realize,
this life is not that of the typical NBA
player. Only the truly elite players lead
such thoroughly idyllic lives. Michael
Jordan, for instance, has nothing to
complain about - no reason to be dis-
content with his contract worth a report*
ed $2.8 gajillion. He's already won the
negotiation game.
It's the other 37.5 percent of the
league that is getting shafted.
The average NBA player doesn't have
everything quite so well. He is just your
usual millionaire struggling to make
ends meet. He doesn't sleep with
Madonna, rap with Fu-Schnickens, or
make films with Bugs Bunny. Instead
he ambles around the court for a couplW
of minutes each game to fill the void
left behind when one of the rich players
needs a rest. He sits idly by while cam-
era crews trample him to get to Charles
Barkley or Jeff Hornacek.
And even thoughthe makes more
money in one year than most people
made in the 1980s, something still
gnaws at him. Something quite under-
standable.
The NBA each year makes mo
money than most people would imag
ine. While individual teams may have
its own money problems, the consump-
tion effected by ticket sales, game-time
commercials and N BA merchandising
earns the league about $2 billion each
year.
However, most of thaterevenue is
structured away from the very players
whose sweat adorns the NBA logo. If
you think the athletes make a lot o
money, leaf through the fat wallets or-
the men who run the league. Then.
you'll see true disparity.
What's at issue here is not whether
players make enough money to sub-
sist - I'm pretty sure Allen Iverson
has more than enough money to feed
ED BLUM
LSA SENIOR
Letter
distorted
animal rights
cause
TO THE DAILY:
I am writing in response to
Julie Jeschke's letter of Oct. 19
("Crime at Kresge is 'sicken-
ing"'). When I read the origi-
nal "Crime Notes" write-up
that described the theft and
vandalism of animal research
data at Kresge Medical
Research Center, I too was
"sickened." But, as president
of the Michigan Animal Rights
Society, I was even more sick-
ened to read Jeschke's letter
pinning responsibility for the
crime on animal-rights
activists, "the only ones who
could possibly see this act as
being worthwhile."
What would a true advo-
cate for animals have to gain
by destroying this type of data?
Now, 16 more mice may be
killed to repeat the original
procedure and produce
replacement data. The majority
of animal activists understand
the law haveo merefficent