OP/ED 5A - The Michigan Daily - Thursday, April 11, 2002 'U' president should be focused on 'U' students Search needs to be quick and yield a president dedicated to campus Re-evaluating college athletics Ed Martin scandal calls institution to question ome time this summer, the Presi- dential Search Committee expects to finish a process that it began in 0 November by naming a new University president to replace departed president, Lee Bollinger. A June announcement would end the search six months after it began, making it half as long as the last search and satisfying the need to complete the process as quickly as possible without compromising its integrity. The status of the search remains unclear and the list of candidates remains a secret. As such, the committee needs to keep some concerns in mind, since the new president's vision will be crucial in setting the tone of the University's future agenda. . Bollinger was an outspoken advocate of affirmative action in higher education and provided a solid figurehead for the defense of University admission policies. * It is essential that the committee hire a new president who continues to reflect the University's commitment through his or her politics and through vocal support for the issue. The language of the search criteria cites a dedication to comprehensive diversity but does not specify a commitment to affirma- tive action. While it seems improbable that the University would reverse its stand on affirmative action, the search committee must hire someone who is personally dedi- cated to the issue. During his tenure, Bollinger continually dragged his feet on labor issues. He only begrudgingly joined the Worker Rights Consortium and oper- ated in an underhand- ed manner in signing a} contract with Nike, the company with a deplorable record in the area of human rights. The new presi- dent must maintain a sympathetic attitude toward campus labor issues, including tak- ing definite steps toward ender the Uni- versity's contract with New Era. Some people would say Bollinger ended his term with a reputation for plac- ing his own politics first and students sec- ond. Interim President B. Joseph White has proven particularly receptive to student concerns during his tenure and the future president ought to continue this policy. Fre- quent and open dialogue with students should be a basic tenet of the new presi- dent's creed. Also on the horizon is the actual money raising phase of the University's next major fundraising campaign. In the past, the Uni- versity has navigated fundraising cam- paigns under transitional leader- ship with positive results. However, an established president is necessary to stabi- . lize the present effort, especially during the opening stages. A June announcement would allow ade- quate time for the incoming president to establish himself or herself before the fundraising begins. -.. In addition, the arrival of a new president will allow for the appointment of several key University posi- tions, including a new provost, vice presi- dent for development and vice president for medical affairs. While not as pressing as the presidency, these positions are impor- tant and need to be filled equally quickly. The indictment of former Michigan men's basketball booster, Ed Martin, marks the continuation of a series of alleged athletic scandals. What is touted again and again as one of the most success- ful and renowned collegiate athletic pro- grams in the nation has been shaken and irreversibly harmed. Calls for sanctions, discontinued relations with past basketball stars implicated in the alleged money laun- dering scandal and even a resurgence of a debate about whether elite athletes should be compensated has brought the storied Michigan athletic tradition to a new low. Such calls, however, are premature and given the ongoing federal investigation and the eventual criminal trial or plea bargain, a resolution will be reached and closure eventually achieved. Whatever the outcome of the criminal proceedings against Ed Martin, little is like- ly to be resolved in terms of the nature and purpose of collegiate athletics. The Univer- sity must take an active role in pragmatical- ly returning athletics to its core function as an extracurricular activity while addressing the real concerns surrounding revenue sports and their athletes. Unfortunately, the University is unlikely to give careful con- sideration to the direct role it plays in creat- ing an environment that places inordinate demands on athletes. Lucrative marketing contracts, televi- sion and radio-broadcasting rights, ,mer- chandising agreements, endorsements and tournaments raised to the level of national sporting events are more than a simple reality, they are the impetus for the scandals of the sort associated with Ed Martin. The University seems all too will- ing to accept these negative consequences as mere costs of the "business" that has become college sports. In the coming months, the University will no longer continue its internal investi- gation into the Ed Martin scandal. As a pre- liminary matter, sanctions and relationships with past stars should not be instituted until the entire incident is, completely resolved. ,However, now that the specific episode is beyond the University's control it should invest its resources towards reclaiming con- trol of the quasi-independent Athletic Department. It is also necessary for the to carefully study its own role in the overall nature of collegiate athletics and the busi- ness-oriented goals that have displaced the central mission of collegiate athletics - providing unique extracurricular opportuni- ties to talented student-athletes, maintaining a proud athletic tradition and promoting the University spirit. A year of campus e OpinionS. vents and Daly Code revisions on deck for next school year * Code reviewers have poor material to work with; should start from scratch Affirmative action still up 'U' must remain dedicated through court battles Beginning with their matricula- tion at the University, every student tacitly agrees to abide by the tenets of the Student Code of Conduct (now renamed the Statement of Students Rights and Responsibili- ties). In the 2000-2001 academic year, the Office of Student Conflict Resolu- tion, which administers the Code, received 671 alleged violations rang- ing from illegal possession of alcohol to physical assault. At the center of the Code is an unconstitutional arbi- tration process that tramples the right to fair disciplinary hearings. Every other academic year the Code can be amended and with next year eligible for amendments students should gear up to aggressively challenge the Code. The Code forbids students from having an advocate speak on their behalf at their hearing. Nervous stu- dents confronting serious punishments such as suspension or expulsion should not be required to defend themselves during the procedure. This requirement is a direct refutation of the right to council. Hearsay evidence is permitted in the procedures and students can face double jeopardy. The hearings are closed to the public and the opportuni- ty to appeal the board's verdict is restricted. As a public university, the University has the responsibility to uphold constitutional protections in its internal justice system. The Code's complete failure to uphold these pro- tections should initiate student-led efforts to obliterate the Code in the approaching academic year. While the Code has usually provoked the ire and oppo- sition of students it has persisted. The main reason for the doc- ument's stub- b o r n endurance is that the Pre si - dent h as the sole authority to approve final amend- ments to the Code. Only the Michigan Student Assembly, the Senate Assem- bly or the Executive Officers of the University can offer amendments to the Code. After these proposed amend- ments are issued, they are reviewed by SACUA's Students Relations Commit- tee, which forwards them to the Presi- dent who has final authority over any changes. Last February, University Vice President for Student Affairs E. Royster Harper sent an e-mail to the student body saying former President Lee Bollinger had accepted 85 percent of the proposed changes. In actuality these changes were superficial and insignificant. Grammatical and spelling changes to the Code made up a substantial por- tion of Harper's figure. At the time, OSCR director Keith Elkin argued the changes were "not superfluous win-' dow-dressing." However, Elkin now admits that Bollinger's changes have had a negligible effect on the resolu- tion process. In reality the changes have not addressed the most serious problems with the Code. MSA and its new executive slate of Sara Boot and Dana Glassel should start working on Code revisions at the beginning of the coming academic year. A primary goal of the Students First administration must be perma- t has become clear that the lawsuits against the University concerning its affinmative action policy are the most direct challenges to affirmative action in higher education since Bakke v. The Regents of the University of California. This year marked "round two" when the University made its case in front of the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals in Cincin- nati in October. Whatever the outcome of these two cases is in Cincinnati, it is likely that C there will be an appeal and the final decision willl be made by the United States Supreme Court. ___ Therefore, it is nearly cer- tain that the fate of affir- mative action in higher education will be decided in the coming years. In this historic battle, through which the Wash- ington-based Center of Individual Rights seeks to end the racially-based selection policies of colleges and universi- ties, the University finds itself as the lone defender of affirmative action. The decision of the Sixth Circuit will most likely be handed down early this summer, marking the beginning of the race to the Supreme Court. From then on, it will be our responsibility as a communi- .. to ..,-n a nnalva a rAa c t701O' 1fh n, d5 not have to dedicate themselves to a certain organization, vote a specific way or adhere to one political ideology to participate. The University must strive to protect affirmative action so that administrations across the country can maintain a diverse environment on campus as well as allevi- ate the vast inequality among the races that exists in higher education. Due to the national importance of this case, j) the University must see more open and intelli- gent dialogue so students can understand why we must defend this policy. Debate should be open and honest not simply bickering between extremist groups that take up the entire issue with nothing but dema- gogic rhetoric and all-out immature and unintelli- gent name calling. It should be made clear to the nation that affirmative action is important on this campus because empirical evidence shows that affirma- tive action is the best way to preserve diversity in an educational system which is inarguably unequal. When affirmative action was outlawed at the University of California, the rate of minority enroll- mt arn crown Arn'imArmtllxcarne nrimari-. : >:: ;,_; > : _: . :f::::r. ,. ...