4 - Tuesday, October 31, 2006
The Michigan Daily - michigandaily.com
C Ic it 4an4 aili
Edited and managed by students at
the University of Michigan since 1890
413 E. Huron St.
Ann Arbor, MI 48104
tothedaily@michigandaily.com
EMILY BEAM
DONN M. FRESARD CHRISTOPHER ZBROZEK JEFFREY BLOOMER
EDITOR IN CHIEF EDITORIAL PAGE EDITORS MANAGING EDITOR
Unsigned editorials reflect the official position of the Daily's editorial board. All other signed
articles and illustrations represent solely the views of their authors.
Darlow, ite for regent
Or vote Brandon. Or even the Green Party's Ed Morin.
BUT DON'T VOTE BROWN.
Two seats are open this fall on the University Board
of Regents. From hiring the president to approv-
ing tuition increases, the regents are the ultimate
authority governing the University. Incumbents Kathy White
and David Brandon are seeking to retain their seats for
another eight-year term, but they face challengers of varying
political backgrounds - and levels of competence.
ALEXANDER HONKALA
I like the old
traditions at the
University of
Michigan."
- SUSAN BROWN, Republican candidate
for the University Board of Regents, while
defending Michigamua's past misappropria-
tion of Native American culture and its cer-
emonies, during an endorsement interview
with the Daily's editorial board yesterday
4
,,[j;
fn 1
Letting We the People' rule
J 's hard to imagine a more ideal can-
didate for the University Board of
Regents than Julia Donovan Dar-
low. A lawyer by trade with expertise in
international law and the management
of nonprofits, Darlow's credentials are
impressive - she has served on the exec-
utive committee of the Detroit Medical
Center and chaired the Hutzel Women's
Hospital and the Michigan Supreme
Court Task Force on Gender Issues in the
Courts.
Darlow is enthusiastic about making
the University more accessible, particu-
larly to low-income students. She rec-
ognizes the benefits of fostering links
between Ann Arbor and Detroit. Though
she hasn't come out for or against sky-
boxes, she expressed concern at the lack
of transparency - a positive sign that as
regent, she would prioritize public input.
Despite being a relative newcomer
to the University, Darlow already pos-
sesses a solid grasp of the University's
inner workings. Her broad experience
in nonprofit management ensures she'll
be able to work effectively on the board
from day one. The attention she has paid
throughout her career to issues of diver-
sity will make her valuable as a regent,
especially if Proposal 2 passes. The Daily
endorses JULIA DONOVAN DARLOW
for Regent.
Kathy White, a law professor at
Wayne State University, is up for
re-election after an eight-year
term on the Board of Regents. A main
concern for her next term, should she be
re-elected, is facilitating the University's
contributions to building a knowledge-
based economy to help Michigan move
beyond its manufacturing past. Her
training as an electrical engineer and in
patent law leaves her more qualified than
most to deal with the minutiae involved
in boosting research and encouraging
entrepreneurship.
Aftereightyears on theboard, the Dem-
ocratic incumbent has a solid understand-
ing of the University's operations - and
has concrete suggestions for improve-
ments. Waste and fraud on University
purchasing cards is one target; another
is increasing financial aid resources by
requiring donors for building projects to
designate a portion of their contribution
to need-based financial aid as well.
As the only working academic on the
board, White brings an important per-
spective to the regents' discussions.
She is critical both of the plans to build
luxury boxes in Michigan Stadium and
the manner in which those plans have
been presented. White points out that
the skybox plan may not address long-
term financial issues facing the Athletic
Department. KATHY WHITE had done
a fine job, and the Daily endorses her for
re-election.
David Brandon - the football
player, business school alum-
nus, chairman and CEO of
Domino's Pizza and incumbent Repub-
lican regent - has done a respectable
job managing the University. His busi-
ness acumen is acute, and his nuanced
understanding of the complex politics
of managing tuition costs while striv-
ing to maintain the "culture of Michi-
gan" indicates a realistic commitment
to driving down the University's costs
by managing budgets and generating
revenue streams. Brandon's remark-
able record of donations to the Univer-
sity might not affect his qualifications
as an extremely competent managerial
candidate for the Board of Regents one
way or the other, but such philanthropy
is certainly commendable.
Brandon, however, shows too much
of the character of his day job as CEO in
downplaying the importance of account-
ERIN RUSSELL I
ability and transparency in the Board
of Regents' dealings with students and
others outside of the immediate bureau-
cracy. A major proponent of the stadium
renovation plan that would place luxury
boxes in Michigan Stadium, he doesn't
seem troubled by maneuvers such as the
placement of the renovation plan on the
agenda for the May meeting after the
deadline for public comment had passed.
Still, the University could - and, in
fact, very well might - do worse than to
see Brandon serve on the board for eight
more years.
Susan Brown is the product of gen-
erations of proud University gradu-
ates. That much is clear. But little
else is, including why the Republican
Party chose to nominate her.
Simply put, Brown is not a credible
candidate. She clearly loves the Universi-
ty, her alma mater. Her history of service
in fundraising efforts for the University
deserves sincere praise. However, noth-
ing in her background or her endorse-
ment interview suggests that she would
be able to discharge the responsibilities
of regent in a competent manner.
Brown was most vehement about her
refusal to vote for tuition increases above
the rate of inflation - ever. That's a com-
pelling campaign promise, but in an era
of declining state appropriations, it's also
one that could sacrifice academic quality,
though Brown didn't seem to think that
was the case. Nevertheless, she insisted
that students should vote her out of office
if she ever broke her honorable - though
economically naive - vow.
Until recently, Brown's website includ-
ed a section detailing her opposition to
embryonic stem-cell research. While the
text on her site didn't take a position on
Proposal 2, the page did include state-
ments rather hostile to any race-con-
scious admissions policy.
Those views have now vanished,
though the old page lives on in the Google
cache. As of an endorsement interview
last night, Brown now supports embry-
onic stem-cell research and seems to
oppose Proposal 2, or at least she throws
around the word "diversity" a lot. Be sure
to check www.susan4regent.com for sub-
sequent changes of mind.
Brown is not without original ideas -
she stands alone in mourning the chang-
es that led the senior society formerly
known as Michigamua to abandon the
offensive use of Native American culture
during its ceremonies in the past.
That there has been a dispute over
whether theregents should add the words
"gender identity and expression" to the
University's nondiscrimination policy
was news to Brown. She was also unsure
whether the measure on the state ballot
this fall that would mandate inflationary
increases in education funding was Pro-
posalSor the nonexistent Proposald6.
Brown's deference to higher - and,
dare we say, more competent - authori-
ties seems to be a campaign theme. When
questioned about her qualifications for
managing a multi-billion dollar institu-
tion, she admitted that she was no "card-
shark" and insisted optimistically that
the Board of Regents could bring in finan-
cial consultants. Asked what changes the
University would need to make to main-
tain a diverse student body if the Michi-
gan Civil Rights Initiative passes, Brown
absolved herself from all problem-solv-
ing responsibility by stating that there
are lots of smart people here, so someone
will come up with something.
Regardless of their political ideology,
the University benefits when compe-
tent, experienced individuals serve as
regents. In her own words, Susan Brown
is an "independent woman." She's also
one who would bring little of value to
the Board of Regents.
ocial conservatives are often
wrongly accused of past projection
- attempting to turn the world as
it is into the world as it
was, back in the "good
ol' days." But modern'
conservatives are far
more visionary than
they get credit for,
especially in Michi-
gan. Following what
seems to be a national -
trend of including JAMES
voter initiatives toD
spike turnout, Michi- DAVID
gan conservatives DICKSON
during the last two -
election cycles have not only rejected the
status quo, but actively have sought to
create a new political reality - and with
quite a bit of success. How? Through the
re-election of George W. Bush and con-
tinued support for Republican congress-
men amid scandal? No - by way of ballot
initiatives.
This November, Michiganvoters -just
like California and Washington voters
before them - will determine the future
of affirmative action. Spurned once again
by the courtsystem, which in2003 upheld
affirmative action in principle even as it
struck down the University's undergrad-
uate admissions system, conservatives
have decided that the people should make
the final decision.
In November 2004, conservatives in
Michigan and 11 other states let the peo-
ple decide on the issue of gay marriage.
All of them banned not only gay marriage,
but any form of homosexual union.
Note that I wrote "conservatives"
rather than "Republicans." In Michigan,
a traditional battleground state where
campaign dollars and votes are tough
to come by, support and funding for the
Michigan Civil Rights Initiative came
by way of conservative efforts at the
grassroots level. Michigan Republicans,
for the most part, have distanced them-
selves from the campaign, well aware of
the effects of high voter turnout in a tra-
ditional battleground state. From Dick
Devos to Michael Bouchard to the state
party, Republicans have failed to support
a social issue most of the party base sup-
ports for fear they'd lose moderates.
Although Ward Connerly, who led the
successful campaign against racial pref-
erences in California, backs MCRI, it's
been overwhelmingly the efforts of con-
servatives at the grassroots level - rather
than Republicans preaching from the
bully pulpit - who got MCRI on the bal-
lot, brought the debate to the voters, and
who will deserve the credit for banning
affirmative action.
And going to the courts hasn't fared
conservatives any better. The opinions
from both Bakke v. Regents of the Uni-
versity of California in 1978 and Gratz
v. Bollinger were either too weak to ban
affirmative action or upheld it in prin-
ciple. These were just the latest in a
long line of Supreme Court rulings that
have angered conservatives. Conserva-
tives have been convinced that "activist
judges" were making up the laws as they
went rather than analyzing the plain
text of the our supreme law ever since
the Supreme Court's landmark ruling in
Brown v.Board ofEducation - and they've
been reaffirmed on issues as far-ranging
as abortion to the Pledge of Allegiance.
Conservatives have only recently begun
to fight back. If Republicans have merely
failed to support the conservative agenda
after being elected, then the high courts
have all but repudiated it.
History may well show that the begin-
ning of the end of judicial activism came
in February 2004, when the Massachu-
setts Supreme Court struck down a state
law banning gay marriage - a law that
had been passed by elected represen-
tatives and signed by the governor. On
the heels of that decision, conservatives
decided to fight back. While the Right
has always decried "activist judges" in
the pages of conservative magazines or
think-tank studies, such outside-the-sys-
tem criticisms have done little to compel
actual public policy. Rather than merely
attack those sworn to interpret the Con-
stitution, voters in 12 states chose to write
the Constitution themselves. After all, it's
not "unconstitutional" if it appears in the
black ink of the Constitution.
Ballot initiatives
and social change
in Michigan.
In the conservative unwillingness to
rely on top-down solutions to social prob-
lems - a distrust that politicians would
forcefully advance conservative views
or that the Supreme Court would find
merit in conservative legal arguments
- conservatives stumbled upon the most
effective bottom-up strategy of all: ballot
initiatives. Such grassroots initiatives are
alluring to conservatives because they
put them in the driver's seat in achiev-
ing social change, rather than waiting
for another high-court ruling to grumble
about. And by going to the voters and ask-
ing "we, the people" to decide where we
stand on important social issues, conser-
vative gains are at once irreversible and
unquestionably legitimate. They were
passed by the voting public, "the people"
themselves. What could be more legiti-
mate?
James Dickson can be reached
at davidjam@umich.edu.
ANDREW KOLTONOW
Do you oppose DHMO?
Last Tuesday and Wednesday, I con-
ducted an informal survey of students
walking through the Diag. I presented
to them a fake petition that called for
a ban on the dumping of the chemical
dihydrogen monoxide into Michigan
waterways. Now, if you stop and think
about the phrase "dihydrogen mon-
oxide" for a second, you may realize
that it refers to the chemical formula
H20, which is water. That's elementary
chemistry. What the survey was intend-
ed to investigate, then, was the extent
to which subjects try to understand an
issue before forming a clear opinion.
I presented the petition precisely as
follows: I stated, "The chemical dihy-
drogen monoxide is a major factor in
acid rain and global warming, and if too
much of it is inhaled into your lungs, it
can kill you. It's important as an indus-
trial solvent and in the production of
Styrofoam, so we can't get an outright
ban on it. Instead, we want to minimize
the environmental impact of DHMO by
getting a ban on the dumping of it into
our waters." I would answer some basic
questions, but if pressed for details, I
Embryonic stem-cell
research could lead to
nation of vampires'
TO THE DAILY:
The subheading for A room of their
own, " 'U' sidesteps stem cell restrictions
by creating privately funded safe haven,"
(10/24/2006) would have been funny if
the subject wasn't so deadly serious. The
Center for Stem Cell Biology is certainly
not a safe haven for the embryos that were
"harvested" so that their body parts could
be experimented on.
Have Center for Stem Cell Biology
Director Sean Morrison and his embry-
onic stem cell research supporters not
heard of informed consent? Morrison
would counter this since an embryo
doesn't have a developed brain, it can't
give informed consent. But an embryo is
not an "it", rather already a "he" or "she"
as determined by chromosomes. If he or
she is not yet able to give or withhold con-
sent, then why would it be automatically
legal to inflict capital punishmentonsuch
an innocent person?
Morrison would complain that an
embryo is not a person. But how does
he know? He might call the embryo a
"lump of tissue," forgetting not only that
at one point he was an embryo, but also
that he still is just a "lump of tissue" from
the point of view of someone bigger and
would dodge the question and offer a
meager or irrelevant response.
Out of 47 students surveyed, 26 signed
the petition, and five stated that they
fully supported my cause but did notsign
the petition either because they were not
registered to vote or for personal rea-
sons. Of the 14 who did not support the
measure, nine realized that I was talking
about water,two opposed environmental
regulationonprinciple and threerefused
to sign because they wanted more infor-
mation about both sides of the issue.
This is too small of a sample to bear
much, if any, scientific significance, but
the survey nonetheless points to a dan-
gerous trend among voters. Thirty-five
out of 47 students - just under three-
quarters - formed a clear, yes-or-no
opinion about DHMO dumping, even
though they clearly did not fully under-
stand the issue. A solid majority (more
than 60 percent) of registered student
voters in the sample opposed the con-
tamination of our lakes and rivers by
water. Of the 38 students who did not
realize exactly what the bill proposed
to do, only three insisted on know-
ing why DHMO is not already banned,
what potential benefits DHMO offers or
how DHMO would be disposed of if not
dumped into waterways.
The implications of this study are
numerous, though the study was con-
ducted on too small of a scale and too
haphazardly to clearly sort out the
underlying problem. That said, I don't
believe the results simply reveal stu-
dents' ignorance about chemistry. My
interpretation of the results is that
students are not taking the correct
approach regarding politics. They are
failing to critically examine argu-
ments and consider both sides of an
issue when forming opinions. Given the
proximity of next week's election, this
is unsettling. I personally urge all vot-
ers to seriously re-evaluate where they
stand on the candidates and proposals
before Nov. 7. Democracy works best
when the voters are fully conscious of
what they're doing - and for the most
part, Michigan students are not.
Andrew Koltonow is an
Engineering freshman.
SEND LETTERS TO: TOTHEDAILY@MICHIGANDAILY.COM
4
stronger who waned to harvest his flesh
(say, a hungry tiger).
Embryonic stem cells are too danger-
ous to use because we don't understand
the transcription factors by which indi-
vidual genes get turned on and off. After
we learn about those transcription fac-
tors (from the approved cell lines), then
we will be able to use adult stem cells to
heal all the diseases for which embry-
onic stem cell research is touted. Given
the rapid advances in technology, this
may happen in as little as five to ten
years.
In the meantime, there is no reason we
should transform into a nation of vam-
pires - not imaginary ones who drink
blood, but real ones who slaughter the
innocent in their attempt to live forever.
Tihamer Toth-Fejel
Engineering non-degree student
Fair-weather fans
dishonor football team
TO THE DAILY:
The student body's collective atten-
dance at Saturday's Northwestern game
was absolutely shameful. Our Wolver-
ines are ranked second in the nation,
have given up 256 yards rushing in nine
games and have made alumni across the
country immensely proud to be Michi-
gan Wolverines this fall. Yet a bit of
rain, an October chill and gusty winds
kept thousands of you at home on Sat-
urday. Shameful! I'm sure many of you
will brag to all of your friends at other
schools about what "huge fans" you are
when (hopefully) you're planning your
trip to (hopefully) Pasadenaor Glendale
next month. Right, you're a huge fan.
No, rather you have a credit card
and some luggage. It's Michigan, it's
October, the weather sucks - duh!
For those of you who skipped out on
Saturday, know that you're the reason
the Big House is known as the "sym-
phony crowd," you're the reason even
Ball State isn't intimated by Michigan
Stadium and you're the reason Michi-
gan will always have its reputation as
a champagne-and lobster atmosphere.
I assure you that the students in South
Bend, Columbus or Morgantown aren't
so freaked out by a teeny bit of freezing
rain and (oh, the horror) 25 mph winds.
The football team has rebounded from
a disastrous 2005 to reclaim its posi-
tion among the nation's elite. The least
you could do is take two Advil, throw
on a sweatshirt and mittens, grab a hot
chocolate and sing "The Victors" in the
wind and rain. I'll see you out West in a
few months. No worries - it'll be sunny
and 75 out there!
Stu Berlow
Alum
MY HAI.LOWEENCOSTUME IS
NOT A CAMPAIGNING GIMMICK AS YOU CAN SEE, WITH THI .,S U PAY NO ATTENTION
POP SSNA1OI' SOB CO'EM21 SUCKSETH'SP, I'M CU~r AN TO TE POLITCIAN
INNOCENTFTTSOLEOY HANOIN6 ME A WHOPPING
TItCK-O'- PSAtINS.PAYCHECK
u s
D