4A -The Michigan Daily - Monday, October 25, 2004 OPINION + +U 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, M148109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JORDAN SCHRADER Editor in Chief JASON Z. PESICK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other pieces do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. NOTABLE QUOTABLE 'There 's no such thing as a Clinton Republican, at least outside of a schizophrenic clinic." - Nelson Warfield, spokesman for Bob Dole's 1996 presidential campaign, as reported yesterday by Reuters. SAM BUTLER L '">-~ ° td I r' " 0 /3/l = '/V I/sIr.~ 0~J L r Thanks but no thanks DANIEL ADAMS RSESHOES AND HAN:) R ENAIES "I found this yellow jour- nalism to be so short sighted and biased that it can be summed up as nothing other than "ignorant." Adams has the unique opportunity to write for one of the most respected student news- papers in the country. He should start writing like it." - Mike Lieto, Letter to therEditor (Adams misrepresented Sigma Chi's record of charity, 9/30/03) That little ditty was a small excerpt of a letter that appeared last year on this very page, blasting me for a column I had written criticizing Sigma Chi and its expulsion from the Greek system. I've been with this paper for three years now, and in that time, I've written several very critical columns about the Greek system. These columns, in turn, have been my most consistent source of angry letters, both to the editor and to my person, justifiably upset at my criticism of something that many on this cam- pus care a lot about. This column, however, won't be an angry public roasting of the Greek system - not entirely, anyway. First off, I wanted to thank people like Mike Lieto, for taking the time to give me their feed- back of my work. Second, I wanted to thank the Greek system, for making me look good and people like Mike Lieto look very, very bad. Now, the point here isn't to gloat - again, at least not entirely. But, with the latest Greek scandal gracing the front pages of last Wednesday's Daily, who could blame me for taking a moment to reflect on what have been two terrible, embarrassing, disgraceful years for the University's Greek system. In the time that I've worked for this paper, a hazing ritual at Sigma Chi led to a pledge being hospitalized for kidney failure and the fraternity being booted off campus. Sigma Alpha Epsilon and Delta Kappa Epsi- lo were involved in a multi-person brawl last February. The Interfraternity Council and the Panhel- lenic Association were embarrassed last year when they sent one of their members to the hospital with alcohol poisoning. Now this latest crisis - allegations of a haz- ing scandal implicating seven houses on campus, the most shocking of which is a case in which intoxicated sorority pledges were forcibly stripped and put into a room with similarly intoxicated fra- ternity pledges. One can only imagine what could have happened next. Unquestionably, my preference is that the Greek system fix what's wrong with it. Unfor- tunately, it has time and time again proven unwilling or unable to do this. Last year, the University proposed a number of changes designed to, "adopt proactive practices to pre- vent hazing." The Greek system opposed these changes. This fall, the University announced that it was dropping the proposal. None of the changes have been adopted. So, as my optimism that the Greek system will right itself wanes, I'll settle for the smug sense of satisfaction that comes at having my conclusions confirmed time and time again. So, seriously guys, thanks! Not only are you guys actively helping me, one of your most ardent detractors, paint your organization negatively in print, but you're mak- ing your allies - those who have stuck their col- lective necks out defending you - look like fools. They wrote me. They called me out. Told me that I am a jerk. That the Greek system was more than just date rape and hazing scandals. And boy, are you guys proving them wrong. So given that you folks can't or won't help out your most ardent supporters, I will. I'll save them the trouble of writing me this time, by pointing out the best of the dozens of excus- es that I've received: "This goes on in every dorm, on every college campus in the coun- try." "The Greek system does a lot of good." "We're working on these problems, and all you do is criticize." The answer to each is yes. Yes, all of the above are absolutely true. But charity and good intentions only get you so far. They certainly don't excuse much, and they do even less to account for the deafening silence that inevitably follows any Greek scandal. Every time it happens, everyone acts surprised, as if they really didn't know this was going on. But ask any Greek member in private, and they know. And if not, they're the only ones who don't. Last year, after the Sigma Chi incident broke, then IFC President Branden Muhl said the fol- lowing, " It's absolutely unfathomable what would produce or provoke hazing such as this." Now, one year and several scandals later, are we still this confused? Adams can be reached at dnadams@umich.edu. 4 LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Viewpoint leaves graduate student 'flabbergasted' TO THE DAILY: As an engineering graduate student look- ing to graduate in about a year, I'm starting to know the frustrations of job searching. Fur- ther, I think I can understand how frustrating it could be for noncitizens to be turned down for interview after interview because of their citi- zenship status. However, we shouldn't let our frustrations and bitterness drive us to make unreasonable accusations as to why we don't get certain jobs, which is what I feel Walid El- Asmar did in his written viewpoint (Following Through, 10/21/04). I must say, when I read that piece, I was a lit- tle ... flabbergasted. Beginning with his accu- sation that a policy of preferential hiring of U.S. citizens is unjust, El-Asmar moved right into some passive-aggressive insults aimed at the quality of the U.S. student body, and then devolved into some erratic rant about how this all leads to suicide bombings in Gaza. I think, overall, the underlying message is that Walid El-Asmar is pissed because no one will hire him because they think he's a terrorist. I'll make one concession and say that he might be right about that. However, his broader argu- ment that it is unjust for some U.S. companies to require employees to have U.S. citizenships is, I think, ridiculous. There are other merits to look at besides technical skills, and I think a U.S. citizenship is a real merit for many com- panies. Here are a few reasons why: For one, a significant number of these employers are laboratories or contractors that work on classified technology and have to deal with issues of national security. Also, even some non-contractors have to deal with "export control" on some technologies. So, it really isn't practical for them to hire non- citizens because these noncitizens couldn't work on these types of projects. Besides these direct national security issues, there is also the issue of accountability. There is a charac- ter requirement to getting a U.S. citizenship, and a lot of companies like to see that. Also, if a person has gone through the trouble of getting his citizenship, it demonstrates a com- mitment to staying here, increasing the likeli- hood that the prospective hiree will make a permanent career of his or her new job and. not run off with conmnanv secret to work in the employers are "discriminating" against. I know a few European students having the same troubles finding themselves a job. Trevor Strickler Rackham American companies justified in requiring employees to be citizens TO THE DAILY: While I appreciate the frustration of finding a job in today's environment, I believe that Walid El- Asmar overlooked two major factors in his recent viewpoint (Following through, 10/21/04). The first factor is simple, and hopefully not too controversial. Many of the companies represented at the career fair were either U.S. agencies (CIA, NSA, NRC, etc.) or defense contractors (Northrop Grum- man, General Dynamics, etc.) who require employ- ees to obtain a security clearance. Security clearances cannot be given to foreign nationals, and so these types of companies do not hire foreign nationals, as they cannot obtain the nec- essary security clearances. I do not believe this is discriminatory, it's just common sense that if you're doing classified government work, you need to be a U.S. citizen. El-Asmar continues in his viewpoint to say that "Any nationality-based policy ... is a form of dis- crimination." He neglects to mention that in many other countries around the world, foreigners are gen- erally prohibited from seeking employment. In Germany (and most European Union countries) for example, non-EU citizens may not seek employ- ment except under exceptional circumstances, and even then may not be allowed to work permanently. In Egypt, companies are restricted to the number of foreigners they may employ. Engineering jobs are leaving the United States and landing in countries that won't even allow Americans to work. Is it so wrong for U.S. companies to protect those jobs still left and offer preferences to American citizens? The United States still allows foreigners to work within its borders, but this is a privilege and not a right. I hope that we never are in a situation like Ger- many, where due to high unemployment, foreigners are mostly excluded from the job market. However, America has neither the obligation nor the ability to employ the world. We allow foreigners to work here because we find many benefits, both cultural and practical, but this is not somethine that should he taken for granted .Is has made monumental mistakes by discrimi- nating against others. We pride ourselves in being a land of justice, equality and freedom, yet we consistently deny rights to individuals based on race, religious beliefs, sex, ethnicity and now sexuality. Michigan law already denies homosexuals the right to marry. However, Proposal 2 requests that we add this denial of rights to our state constitu- tion. If voters pass Proposal 2, however, they will not simply re-affirm their stance against gay mar- riage, but will also unintentionally do much more. The proposal's language insists on the elimination of legal recognition "similar" to marriage "for any purpose." Therefore, voters will also elimi- nate homosexuals' eligibility for civil unions and more importantly, health insurance and other such benefits from their employers. This unnecessary removal of benefits would also deny those benefits to the children of any homosexual couples. Proposal 2 is not worth taking away the ben- efits of even one child., No matter what stance you take on homosexual marriage, every person within Michigan should agree that all children are entitled to health insurance and benefits. No child should be left behind because of discrimination. No child should be left behind because of unnec- essary initiatives. No child should be left behind for any purpose at any time. However, Proposal 2 would leave many children behind, simply to re- affirm what is already illegal. Homosexuals do not have the right to marry in Michigan. Proposal 2 is unnecessary and would hurt Michigan fami- lies and children. Proposal 2 is also a mistake because it asks voters to rubber stamp discrimination in our society. America has discriminated against many groups throughout her history, most notably against Native Americans, blacks and women. Our nation has been faced with many choices, and we always seem to make the wrong ones. Generation after generation, Americans have been forced to undo mistakes made against oth-. ers. We still fight daily to guarantee equality to blacksand even women in the workforce. Michi- gan voters are now faced with another choice. We may choose to yet again allow discrimina- tion, adding it to our much-beloved constitu- tion, or we can stand up against discrimination, attempting to stop the epidemic that has spread throughout America. We can be one of the first states to say "NO!" and we must. We must live up to Martin Luther King Jr.'s words: "I have a dream that one dav this nation Si