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.