4 -- The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, November 16, 1999
E £iligaw P gil
What would you do with a great big
420 Maynard Street
Ann Arbor, MI 48109
daily.letters@umich.edu
Edited and managed by
students at the
University of Michigan
HEATHER KAMINS
Editor in Chief
JEFFREY KOSSEFF
DAVID WALLACE
Editorial Page Editors
Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of'the
Dailvys editorial board All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect
the opinion of The Michigan Daily.
Iniable candidates
Angell poster problem needs new solution
would like to entreat one of you reading
this column. if you have the wherewithal,
to send me a great big bag of money. I affirm
that as I write this. I do not bring my pinky
finger to my lip in a Dr. Evil-like demand.
I leave it to you to
decide exactly how big
a bag, but suffice to
say it should be
enough to alleviate
that graduating college
student woe: financial
instability.
So depending on the
denominations filling
the sack, you likely
need anywhere from a
Ford F-150 to a U-
Haul truck for trans- David
port. Wallace
While I really have Ed .
no grounds to make >
further requests, I pre-
fer you send U.S. cur-
rency. But look, if you're loaded with Euros,
don't let it stop you. (If this works, students,
I'll do my best to get you your own big bag of
money.)
I am not nuts: this idea can work. There are
plenty of people out there who can help.
Plenty of people with huge bags of money sit-
ting around, who just might stumble across
this column.
Bill Gates, for example. Gates has enough
money to actually pay a Dr. Evil demand, so I
shouldn't be too bad. Bill could just send me
the bag of money he uses as a beanbag chair
in his rumpus room. He'd never miss it.
But I know Bill's got some problems with
the government - who knows. Microsoft
might split into Baby Bills - so he probably
doesn't have time right now.
Fine, we've got other people. Juliana
Margulies just gave away the chance to make
527 million for two years' work on "ER." If
she can turn down that much, she must have
enough dough to pass some my way and never
notice a difference.
But I know some of you say you've seen
this before. Person gets on show, person gets
too big for show, person leaves show, person
falls out of spotlight, person ends up in cast of
"Troop Beverly Hills." Right, so maybe she
should hoard what she's got.
All right, so there might be more diffi-
culty than expected. While we try to think
of another person to help, let's clear up a
few questions.
Is this the laziest proposal ever? Maybe. I
base all this on the observation that most peo-
ple worry about money and health over every-
thing else. And since we're college students,
and hence cannot die, we don't worry about
health. Maybe in 20 years, if that impossible
amount of time passes.
That leaves money as our major concern. A
lot of us get out of college with big student
loans. Five-figure student loans we compare
to our starting salaries and get a difference of
SI .50. Well, why not pay it off all at once? You
made a dollar go far in college. And if you
can't? Do the college thing again and call
Mom and Dad.
But wait - calling Mom and Dad is the
last thing we want, not to mention the last
thing they probably want. You're supposed to
grow up, go to college and get a job; not grow
up, go to college and move your broke self
back in with Mom and Dad. So to avoid that
outcome, or a quite modest existence. I'd
wager a fair number of us take jobs we really
don't want.
This is too often the question: Are we going
to do what we like, or what pays more? I've
seen people opt for the latter, and it doesn't
,always work out that well. Maybe they sup-
bag of money?
port themselves better than most, but a dislike
for what they do shows up elsewhere. That
health thing, for one.
So do I dare argue we should consider our
personal happiness as we prepare for life after
college?
It's so childish, isn't it? Being an adult
means doing what you don't like because you
must. I gather.
But I'm not out of my gourd. Our society
prizes personal happiness as much as strug-
gle, though we often forget it. We're founded
on the principle: The Declaration of
Independence argues for "the pursuit of
Happiness" as our "unalienable Right."
No doubt we value our happiness. We're
willing to pay exorbitantly those we look for
when the work is done. People like Tom
Cruise, Ken Griffey Jr. and Oprah Winfrey
make tons of cash for filling up our free time.
So if we'll pay for that which makes us happy,
why don't we try to be happy?
As for the people I mentioned, you know *
what the kicker is? They make that money
doing things they love. And maybe that's why,
ultimately, we pay their large salaries. Maybe
loving something gives you a talent you can't
fake.
I'm not saying we should all become pro-
fessional athletes or entertainers. They're just
the most visible illustration for my point.
Often, it's riskier to go after what you want,
but there's a bigger payoff. My concern is that
we've all got dreams, but too many of us let
our financial worries set us on another course
As we're searching for our futures, maybe we
should imagine having that great big bag of
cash I began with and ask ourselves, "If I did-
n't worry about money, would I still do this?"
If the answer is "no," we've still got time to
chase down that dream.
- David Wallace can be reached over
e-mailat davidmwgumich.edu.
G
T wice a year the college political
process bombards the University
community with more florescent colors
and slogans than students imagined possi-
ble. Candidates vying for a seat on the
Michigan Student Assembly or LSA-
Student Government aim the barrage at
Angell Hall, causing a glut of trash during
the weeks of campaigning. Now, citing
environmental reasons and a fear of
counter-productivity, the Michigan
Student Assembly banned the placement
of any campaign material in the Angell
Hall complex. While MSA made its deci-
sion with good intentions, banning cam-
paign material in certain areas is not an
appropriate solution for the problems cre-
ated by campaigning.
MSA is not completely misguided in
its attempt to improve the election
process. The vast amount of paper used to
promote candidates and parties is both
wasteful and expensive. The majority of
the paper used is color and therefore
more difficult to recycle. The sheer vol-
ume of paper needed to cover Angell
Hall's surface provides distinct advan-
tages to the party system and wealthy
candidates. The costs of printing reach
excessive levels, leaving behind indepen-
dents who cannot foot the copying bill.
MSA also wants to increase candidates'
direct contact with students by forcing
those running not to rely solely on
posters.
Even accounting for the problems
MSA hopes to fix by banning posters in
the Angell Hall complex, the amount of
attention brought by the posters in the
building far exceeds the negative conse-
quences accompanying the campaign
process.
Wall to wall posters are a sure sign that
election time is near, signaling students to
check out candidates and look for an e-
mail telling them to vote once again.
MSA complained for years about the lack
of student participation. Now that MSA
eliminated its largest advertising source,
student involvement likely will fall fur-
ther past already low voting levels. While
the amount of money spent on campaign-
ing and the paper it wastes is a problem,
the solution enacted should not draw'
attention away from the election.
The poster problem's remedy is not to
eliminate their existence, but to change
the way candidates and the University
deal with campaign material. Presently,
the University requires the staff who work
in Angell Hall to remove posters placed in
certain areas each evening. This requires
candidates who wish to remain visible to
reapply their posters early each morning,
thus creating the environmental waste and
prohibitive cost MSA wishes to eliminate.
Instead, the University should consider
a one week period agreed upon by both
MSA and University staff when no
posters would be taken off the walls. This
would substantively decrease the amount
of paper and money used while creating
the amount of publicity and public aware-
ness needed to make an election success-
ful. MSA, as a liaison between the
University's students and staff, holds the
resources necessary to create and initiate
such a plan.
CHIP CULLEN
Hindering the process
Voting law hurts students
E arlier this year, in a deplorable attack
on the voting rights of students,
Michigan's legislature passed a law pre-
venting anyone from being registered to
vote at any location other than the address
on their driver's license. The ostensible
reason for this change is to make state
record keeping more efficient and cut
down on voter fraud. But voter fraud is
hardly a rampant problem in Michigan.
The idea that the state government is
under a huge burden by having to handle
driver licenses and voter registration at
different addresses, as they have always
managed to do in the past without inci-
dent, is absurd.
The real intent of this law is incredibly
disturbing and becomes completely
apparent when one considers who it will
affect - and who sponsored it.
The only group of people in Michigan
who frequently register to vote at address-
es different from those on their driver
licenses are college students. The senator
who sponsored the law, state Sen. Mike
Rogers (R-Lansing), is running for con-
gress next year in Michigan's 8th district.
The 8th is a swing district covering the
Lansing area with an almost equal number
of Republicans and Democrats - and a
district where Michigan State University
students largely vote Democratic.
Getting as many MSU students out of
his district as possible will clearly help
Rogers in his congressional race - but
this law will affect races for state local
offices as well - not just in the 8th dis-
trict.
The effect of this law will be to drive
participation is already relatively low, but
forcing the inconvenience and cost of
having to either change the address on
their driver license or go home to vote
will only bring student participation
down even further. This law is a blatant
and sickening attack on the voting rights
of students.
Rogers's law, written not only for his
personal gain, but also to help
Republicans across the state by disenfran-
chising a group that does not vote heavily
Republican, is an affront to democracy
and must be stood up to.
To vote next year, students need to
make sure they either register to vote at
the address on their driver's license, vote
absentee at that address or, most prefer-
ably, change their license to their school
address.
Students should vote where they attend
school. They spend most of their time
each year on campus. Some may think
going home once every couple years to
vote for president or governor is not a big
deal, but they miss out on voting in local
races and having any influence on issues
in the place that most affects them.
Students should take the time to change
the address on their driver licenses and
make sure their voice can be heard on the
local issues that affect them.
Regardless of where they prefer to
vote, students must be aware of this law
and not expect they can simply register to
vote in Ann Arbor or wherever else they
go to school as they always have been
able to in the past. Students need to make
their registration match their driver
Rioting legislation
serves as effective
deterrent
TO THE DAILY:
While I respect the Daily's right to
oppose legislation prohibiting rioters
from attending public institutions of high-
er education ("Wronged Rioters"
11 10 99). the argument put forth in this
particular editorial is, by far, the worst
constructed of any written by the Daily
this year. Your argument is fatally flawed
in three ways.
First.the Daily writes, "Inherently, a
person pursuing higher education desires to
become a productive citizen." Someone
should let the Unabomber know that. Such
are the dangers of unqualified, idealistic
statements.
Seconi. the Daily notes, "In a democ-
racy, we call this double jeopardy."'
However, the Daily would have done well
to consult a basic legal dictionary to find
that "double jeopardy" refers not to two
phases of punishment, but to two separate
trials, as, generally speaking, jeopardy
commences when a jury is sworn, or, in
the case of a bench trial, when the first
witness is sworn.
Finally, the assertion that "this bill
would deny convicted students the opportu-
nity to begin straightening out their lives for
two years" is the weakest of the whole
piece. My, what a provincial viewpoint. Is a
college education the only viable option for
a young adult to make a way in the world?
Certainly, it's the most advantageous way.
But what about enlistment in the military,
or. God forbid, employment in the working
world?
Maybe after a few months of back-
breaking work under an unappreciative
boss, or after a few weeks paid vacation at
Parris Island training to defend this country
that, directly or indirectly, afforded the con-
victed student the resources for a world
class education, one might appreciate the
privilege that he lost and the gravity of his
offense. In the realm of "reality," we call
this a deterrent.
STEVE COUCH
LSA JUNIOR
Admissions should
consider class,
not race
TO THE DAILY:
This is a response to the letter to the edi-
tor written by Jodi-Marie Masley
("Integration is 'under siege' across the
country" 11/5/99).
Before dealing with the substance of
Masley's claims, it is rather remarkable that
Masley clearly holds the belief that people
who oppose affirmative action are doing so
not because of any good intentions they
may have, but rather because they are
racists. Under this logic, Ward Connelly
(A)RIT/NG A FOCI
ARGUME'NTATIV5
S~r H.l~IOFF?
J'
sc I
~PPER
;, '! e Q
, O '9
'4
0
T1I y cu,., - X-1e-" E
Moving on to the substantive part of the
letter, which was that an attack on affirma-
tive action constitutes an attack on integra-
tion. It's first important to note that affir-
mative action has not promoted integration
in the past. Even after 30 years of affirma-
tive action, neighborhoods and social
groups are more segregated now than they
were in 1950. Masley assumes the connec-
tion between affirmative action and integra-
tion without supplying any evidence for the
connection. It seems to me that such an
assumption is questionable.
Even more importantly, when we look at
injustices in our society from racial profil-
ing to the discriminatory application of the
death penalty, what's painfully evident in so
many of these cases is the presence of sub-
conscious discrimination. In other words,
people discriminate not because they are
overt racists, but rather because they are
racially conscious, and therefore more sus-
picious on people of another race. Our anti-
discrimination laws will not solve for sub-
conscious discrimination because without
the conscious intent to discriminate, the
ground for prosecuting discrimination does
not exist in most cases. Therefore, the only
way to solve for discrimination, and achieve
integration is to achieve a race blind society
where racial consciousness no longer mat-
ters in public discourse.
Affirmative action reinforces the idea
that different races are different by advocat-
ing differing treatments on the basis of race,
and thus through its application entrenches
subconscious discrimination. It seems to
me, then, that integration can only be
achieved by moving away from a race con-
scious admissions system.
On the other hand, a system of class-
based affirmative action seems to achieve
our social objectives much better. A class-
based system does not entrench subcon-
scious discrimination, and therefore
enhances integration in our society. While
the class-based system has not worked as
well as its advocates may like, this is due to
incompetence (such as in Texas) or due to
the fact that the new system came as a'sur-
prise to many minority students. When
these students began their college prep, they
were prepared to face a lower standard than
they now face under the status quo. When
students have adequate warning of the high-
er standards that they are subjected to, they
Men need
education about
eating disorders
TO THE DAILY:
I have just one question for all of the men
who seem to be so concerned with how
women respond to issues of self-esteem and
eating disorders: Why do you feel the need to
tell women how they feel about their bodies
and how these t-shirts affect them? It seems
that over the past couple of weeks a number of
men have decided to make it known that
women are over-reacting, that they should not
worry about their weight and that men have
just as many issues about their bodies. Well, I
really question all of these men.
First of all, I would suggest getting your
facts straight before you argue that women
are "manipulating the statistics" to make
ourselves appear as victims. Jesse Miller,
("Disorder statistics are manipulated"
11/10/99), quotes statistics about women's
body issues, and then says that SAPAC is.
telling you this.
Well Miller, SAPAC is an organization
that addresses sexual assault and prevention.
They do not deal with eating disorders. Also,
before you start diagnosing men that you
know with eating disorders, why don't you
learn what the symptoms are? "Chowing
down on Ruffles while studying" is not an eat-
ing disorder. An eating disorder involves con-
suming very little food, if any at all, for days
at a time. It also involves avoiding food, not
simply missing a meal while you're sleeping
in. Those with eating disorders, some of
whom ARE men, are consumed by these dis-
orders, and you should not trivialize their pain
by comparing them to lazy college students.
Also, to Andy Zimmer ("Women need to fight
social messages" 11/10/99), people can be
overweight AND have eating disorders,
they're called bulimics and compulsive eaters.
Men, and everyone else who questions the
importance of eating disorders, before you
start telling women how to feel and act, why
don't you have a discussion with a women
who has had an eating disorder? Have her tell
you about why she became anorexic and the
pain that she felt, and probably still feels,
because of her eating disorder. Maybe then
you will be able to understand the pain eating
YNA, PUT MA OM
I NK t7 ERS.