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