4A - The Michigan Daily - Thursday, January 16, 2003 OP/ED oJbe £k~igutn ittiIg 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 letters@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JON SCHWARTZ Editor in Chief JOHANNA HANINK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. NOTABLE QUOTABLE I strongly support diversity of all kinds, including racial diversity in higher education, but the method used by the University of Michigan is fundamentally flawed." -President Bush in a speech yesterday announcing his opposition to the University's race-based admissions policies. SkInNIA tAt I'LL. SHOWYOV MrNg, IF vov sy041 *6 you $t{,p NOWEY, YOU K1JOV 'sl DOW4 M f Y()i J sr NAB V, JT:s MY -VW./ KARL KRESSBACH & BEN CARRICO UNTIED NATION S Is it spring break yet? DAVID ENDERS WEIRD SCIENC hile I was home during vacation, my mother told me I should write a col- umn about something that made me happy. I told her I couldn't really think of anything. So I came back to Ann Arbor even earlier than I had planned. That made me happy. I'm not sure if it's going back to Grand Rapids or my family that bothers me more. (Grand Rapids is a place that, among other things, claims former President Gerald Ford as a former resident and names buildings and freeways after him. Amway Corp.'s world headquarters is located in one of its suburbs. In the local paper, there is an ongoing letters to the editor debate on the validity of creation- ism, with justifications ranging from quoting scripture to assuring letter writers espousing the opposing viewpoint they are going to hell. As for my family, I won't air that here.) For those of you still unsure about where Grand Rapids is, point at the pinkie side of your open palm, about the same height as the base of the thumb. I knew long before the end of high school I wouldn't ever go back there to work or live. That realization, I've decided since writing the last paragraph, is fully a function of the type of place it is, reinforced by my family. Ann Arbor is less than two hours from Grand Rapids, but it's worlds apart. I knew when I came to school here I wouldn't stay in Ann Arbor any longer than necessary to graduate. Had it not been so much cheaper than going out of state, I'd be some- where else. That's not to say it hasn't been great. I don't regret a moment of my proverbial college experience, but I'm going to be excited when it's time to leave. I'll be a little nostalgic, I'll miss my friends, but I'm sure I couldn't stay here another year. Perhaps that's because I'll always see Ann Arbor as a transient place (I'm not that excited about getting older while the girls at the bar stay the same age) or because it is increasingly less unique as the University expands and the surrounding area becomes more commercialized. It doesn't really matter. I just know I won't be back. The thing is, I don't know exactly why I'm so happy to be leaving. I have virtually no clue as to where I'll go when my lease here ends in May. I might not have a job. I'm not sure I want one. There are so many options it has become paralyzing. But I can't wait to move out. Perhaps I am one of the few still enamored with the ethos of the road, the notion of giving up everything on the chance you'll get some- thing entirely new and better. Hemingway wrote about the virtues of expatriation, forsak- ing his family for the opportunity to die far, far away from them. Fitzgerald wrote about eras- ing his past, Salinger about the impossibility of absence solving familial problems, and that the prodigal son, in American culture, rarely returns home to a warm welcome. Kerouac understood all of this, but wrote it without the overt thanatos of Hemingway or the excess and romanticism of Fitzgerald. He blew it wide open, and the culture he was a primogenitor of represents one of the last major shifts in our country's collective mindset. It led to the back- lash of the stagnating status quo we have right now. In the United States, progressive thought seems to move in a sort of sine wave, and I pre- sume we are in a trough. At least, I thought my parents worried about some of these same things at some point. So what happened? Why did they move to the suburbs and forget what it was like to hitchhike cross-country on a whim or smoke pot all the time? Did they fail or give up? Am I destined for the same? I keep going over to my ex-girlfriend's house when I could be dating someone new. I drink in the same bar every night instead of trying different ones. I occasionally obsess over lost.friendships I can- not salvage. Somewhere, underneath the urge to run, exists a latent desire to settle down, to fix things before moving again. The problem with the ethos of the road is that giving up and failure are not only one in the same, they are the only options. There is no ful- fillment without reaching the destination. And there is no destination. One just reaches an unmarked end. Empty. I tried to explain all of this to my mother. She told me I shouldn't have come home in the first place. David Enders can be reached at denders@umich.edu. 0 FROM THE WHITE HOUSE Bush: LSA, Law School admissions unconstitutional The following is the full text of President Bush's address to the nation from yesterday. Good afternoon. The Supreme Court will soon hear arguments in a case about admission policies and student diversity in public universi- ties. I strongly support diversity of all kinds, including racial diversity in higher education. But the method used by the University of Michigan to achieve this important goal is fun- damentally flawed. At their core, the Michigan policies amount to a quota system that unfairly rewards or penal- izes perspective students, based solely on their race. So, tomorrow my administration will file a brief with the court arguing that the University of Michigan's admissions policies, which award students a significant number of extra points based solely on their race, and establishes numerical targets for incoming minority stu- dents, are unconstitutional. Our Constitution makes it clear that people of all races must be treated equally under the law. Yet we know that our society has not fully achieved that ideal. Racial prejudice is a reality in America. It hurts many of our citizens. As a nation, as a government, as individuals, we must be vigilant in responding to prejudice wherever we find it. Yet, as we work to address the wrong of racial prejudice, we must not use means that create another wrong, and thus perpetuate our divisions. America is a diverse country, racially, eco- nomically and ethnically. And our institutions of higher education should reflect our diversity. A college education should teach respect and understanding and goodwill. And these values are strengthened when students live and learn with people from many backgrounds. Yet quota systems that use race to include or exclude peo- ple from higher education and the opportunities it offers are divisive, unfair and impossible to square with the Constitution. In the programs under review by the Supreme Court, the University of Michigan has established an admissions process based on race. At the undergraduate level, African American students and some Hispanic students and Native American students receive 20 points out of a maximum of 150, not because of any academic achievement or life experi- ence, but solely because they are African American, Hispanic or Native American. To put this in perspective, a perfect SAT score is worth only 12 points in the Michigan system. Students who accumulate 100 points are generally admitted, so those 20 points awarded solely based on race are often the decisive factor. At the law school, some minority students are admitted to meet percentage targets while other applicants with higher grades and better scores are passed over. This means that stu- dents are being selected or rejected based pri- marily on the color of their skin. The motivation for such an admissions policy may be very good, but its result is discrimination and that discrimination is wrong. Some states are using innovative ways to diversify their student bodies. Recent history has proven that diversity can be achieved without using quotas. Systems in California and Florida and Texas have proven that by guaranteeing admissions to the top student's from high schools throughout the state, including low income neighborhoods, col- leges can attain broad racial diversity. In these states, race-neutral admissions policies have resulted in levels of minority attendance for incoming students that are close to, and in some instances slightly surpass, those under the old race-based approach. We should not be satisfied with the current numbers of minorities on America's college campuses. Much progress has been made; much more is needed. University officials have the responsibility and the obligation to make a serious, effective effort to reach out to students from all walks of life, without falling back on unconstitutional quotas. Schools should seek diversity by considering a broad range of fac- tors in admissions, including a student's poten- tial and life experiences. Our government must work to make college more affordable for students who come from economically disadvantaged homes. And because we're committed to racial justice, we must make sure that America's public schools offer a quality education to every child from every background, which is the central purpose of the education reforms I signed last year. America's long experience with the segrega- tion we have put behind us and the racial dis- crimination we still struggle to overcome requires a special effort to make real the promise of equal opportunity for all. My administration will continue to actively promote diversity and opportunity in every way that the law permits. Thank you very much. VIEWPOINT Praying for the status quo BY SRAVYA CHIRUMAMILLA U.S. Rep. Charles Rangel's (D-N.Y.) call to reinstate the draft brings back to the nation- al spotlight one of the most passionately debated aspects of American military policy. Established when the United States entered World War I, the draft required men between the ages of 21 and 30 to join the armed forces. The draft did not require women and the dis- abled to enroll with the Selective Service Sys- tem. It also allowed for men in college and those who were conscientious objectors to either defer or postpone their enrollment. Exemptions from the draft have often been discussed due to the popularity of draft dodg- ing during the Vietnam War. Congress has since revised the draft exemptions so that col- lege students would not be able to evade mili- tary service but could only postpone it for a semester or an academic year. Religious lead- zens' freedoms to observe religion as an excuse for granting those who follow a religion an upper hand. There are many cases where this also applies at the University: If for example, I were to approach my history professor for an extension on my 23-page term paper citing my need to ritualistically sacrifice my textbooks to the Elephant God, I would be granted the exten- sion; however, this same excuse is not available for those who choose not to practice a religion. The government should not hinder any per- son's practice of his/her religion, however it should also not be influenced by religion. Citing a religious belief should not exempt a person from the laws that govern us all; incidents when parents withhold medical care for their children are cases of negligence and child abuse. Not everyone believes in a god, and even if they did, they should not be forced to say "under God" when reciting their country's pledge. A more dangerous misuse of the govern- mennt uwminld 1,athe nrnnneoA Aictrilhuntinn of potential for a great deal of corruption and unfairness. It is also important to note that money is tangible and while funds provided to these groups might be offered for a specific pur- pose, other functions would also benefit. Since a goal of most religions is to spread the word of their beliefs, many religious organizations could use these funds for that purpose by sponsoring missionaries around the world, which are a great threat to religious freedom. This pacific threat is far more damaging than a group of religious zealots pointing guns to people's heads in order to make the victims convert. The false pretenses of offering food and shelter conceal the fact that the desperate only get these supplies if they con- vert to the particular religion. The government would be indignant if asked to sponsor the mili- tant group and should refuse just as adamantly when a request for funds is received from main- stream religious groups. Religion's involvement in this nation's gov- THE BOONDOCKS AARO~N NMcG(,T )f I x, Ki DONALD "LETS ROMLE" ROMSFELD SAID TODAY THAT THE I